Can my previous employer contact my current employer and say bad things about me? | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Can my previous employer contact my current employer and say bad things about me?

Emefef said:
This reminds me of a funny story with former/new employers.
I had a great relationship with my boss. He left for a new organization. A year later, his replacement called me into a meeting one day and said there was no longer a place for me in the organization, due to a reorganization and changes in the existing position. After some negotiation (I had a very good record), we came to a reasonable settlement and I was bound to confidentiality by that agreement.
Shortly thereafter, I sought and gained employment with - you guessed it - the organization my old boss had moved to. Ironically, the organization I left provided services under contract to my new employer, and it was my responsibility to evaluate those services and report not only to our board, but a higher regulatory authority. I was very specific about the shortcomings of the services offered, and as a courtesy we provided a copy to the organization before filing it officially.
The president of said company, never a fan of mine (I found out later the from the time my new boss started, she had been assigned the task of getting rid of me. It took her a year.), called my current boss and said in a voice mail that it was "inappropriate for someone who had been fired to be conducting the review." Since the terms of my leaving were confidential, and it was never stated that I was "fired", this was not a comment or thought that he should have been sharing. He got a call from my current employer to say that his outburst was not welcome, and a cease and desist letter from my lawyer that threatened action if he made any such comment about my employment record again. Apparently he took that seriously, because I never heard anything like it again and I didn't lighten up until they improved service ironically, after he had been fired.
Click to expand...

I love good payback stories.
 
Your old employer blabbing to your new employer could make them both liable should your current job situation change for the worse.

Lawyer up before any further contact with your ex-employer.

Sent from my Vox using Tapatalk 2
 
OliverK said:
Your old employer blabbing to your new employer could make them both liable should your current job situation change for the worse.
Click to expand...

The problem with that being, of course, that one of them would have to actually own up to it.
 
I would try to nip it in the bud, all this talk about legal action is all after the fact and would cost money that you probably wouldn't have if this all blew up anyway. I would however, consider sending your old employer a written request to resolve a issue while reminding him of your legal rights.
 
Am I the only one that thinks there is a LOT more to this story then the OP is disclosing. Some **** must have hit the fan somewhere and the trail led back to him. If he isnt guilty of anything there is no reason at all not to call and ask wtf is going on, if need be record the conversation.
 
Hi all, and thank you for your help, I am back in the gta and already replied to the email from my old boss, asking him for details of the problem

You are correct, there is more to the story than what I posted, but it is not what you think.

There was a bad relationship with this manager that went on for a few years, to give you an example the day I quit I was so happy that I didn’t have to work there anymore, and he was so angry cause he knew I got a better job. To me it was never personal, but maybe for him it was or is.

People keep saying to record the phone conversation. How do you do that??
 
I was talking about recording voicemail messages, rather than actual phone conversations. Despite Canada being a "one party" recording State, it can get sticky presenting such evidence. When someone leaves you a voicemail message they're already on notice that they've been recorded, and so can't say that they are unaware of that fact. This is especially useful if a threat has been made.

For voicemail to your cell phone just hold the phone up to a mic for your computer, then record it to a file on it.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
... Despite Canada being a "one party" recording State, it can get sticky presenting such evidence. ....
Click to expand...

This isn't the first time I've heard that expressed on this forum but I have never heard of any problems with presenting such evidence. Can you provide any further insight on this?

It is legally recorded if one party is aware of it. What cause can someone have to object? They have no legislated right to be informed.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I was talking about recording voicemail messages, rather than actual phone conversations. Despite Canada being a "one party" recording State, it can get sticky presenting such evidence. When someone leaves you a voicemail message they're already on notice that they've been recorded, and so can't say that they are unaware of that fact. This is especially useful if a threat has been made.

For voicemail to your cell phone just hold the phone up to a mic for your computer, then record it to a file on it.
Click to expand...

I am under the impression that there are some issues in situations where a person does not expect to be photographed but since cameras went digital and every cell phone has one is it realistic to expect to be in a photo free zone anywhere but your own bathroom with the lights out. I don't know if that carries across to voice recording, again on most cell phones. Realistic expectations are different in the digital age.

In today's society if you do it or say it I don't think you can be surprised if it doesn't end up on youtube. The mike is never off. The camera always on. A few politicians careers got sideswiped by them forgetting that.

At one time if you didn't tell the other person you were recording a call there had to be a signal beep every once in a while. When did that rule die?
 
Griffin said:
This isn't the first time I've heard that expressed on this forum but I have never heard of any problems with presenting such evidence. Can you provide any further insight on this?

It is legally recorded if one party is aware of it. What cause can someone have to object? They have no legislated right to be informed.
Click to expand...

Here's one issue, that immediately comes to mind. What if someone speaks to the person being recorded? You've just 'intercepted' a conversation, that you are not part of.

Then there's this:


191. (1) Every one who possesses, sells or purchases any electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device or any component thereof knowing that the design thereof renders it primarily useful for surreptitious interception of private communications is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to

(a) a police officer or police constable in possession of a device or component described in subsection (1) in the course of his employment;
(b) a person in possession of such a device or component for the purpose of using it in an interception made or to be made in accordance with an authorization;
(b.1) a person in possession of such a device or component under the direction of a police officer or police constable in order to assist that officer or constable in the course of his duties as a police officer or police constable;
(c) an officer or a servant of Her Majesty in right of Canada or a member of the Canadian Forces in possession of such a device or component in the course of his duties as such an officer, servant or member, as the case may be; and
(d) any other person in possession of such a device or component under the authority of a licence issued by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.
​

(3) A licence issued for the purpose of paragraph (2)(d) may contain such terms and conditions relating to the possession, sale or purchase of a device or component described in subsection (1) as the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness may prescribe.

nobbie48 said:
I am under the impression that there are some issues in situations where a person does not expect to be photographed but since cameras went digital and every cell phone has one is it realistic to expect to be in a photo free zone anywhere but your own bathroom with the lights out. I don't know if that carries across to voice recording, again on most cell phones. Realistic expectations are different in the digital age.

In today's society if you do it or say it I don't think you can be surprised if it doesn't end up on youtube. The mike is never off. The camera always on. A few politicians careers got sideswiped by them forgetting that.

At one time if you didn't tell the other person you were recording a call there had to be a signal beep every once in a while. When did that rule die?
Click to expand...

That may well be so, but the law doesn't view it that way. There are times and places in which you have an expectation of privacy, which is legally enforceable if breached.
 
Interesting, but you aren't addressing the core issue.

In your first example, you are raising a possibility that may occur. Fair enough but it's pretty unlikely and easily protected against.

Your second example citing the Criminal Code is an article addressing spy devices. Applying in the way you're suggesting is likely would allow it to be applied to anyone in possession of any recording device.

Thanks for the response. It is reassuring to see that you aren't raising anything I need to be concerned about.
 
Griffin said:
Interesting, but you aren't addressing the core issue.

In your first example, you are raising a possibility that may occur. Fair enough but it's pretty unlikely and easily protected against.

Your second example citing the Criminal Code is an article addressing spy devices. Applying in the way you're suggesting is likely would allow it to be applied to anyone in possession of any recording device.

Thanks for the response. It is reassuring to see that you aren't raising anything I need to be concerned about.
Click to expand...

Concern would be situational. Over the phone you have no control over what happens on the other end. The Criminal Code section regarding spying devices is more likely to apply in a face-to-face meeting, but could obviously also be applied to gear used to record telephone conversations.

As in the case of Ian Thompson, an over zealous Crown might not look too closely at intent and reality, before applying the Code.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom