Workplace Defamation – A Basic Overview

Since many terminated and current employees ask about it, I thought I might dive into the treacherous waters of defamation in the workplace.  Defamatory conduct in the workplace may occur, for example, when a discharged employee is removed from an employer’s premises by security personnel, creating the false impression that the employee had committed a crime.  Other times, a terminated employee may find out that a former employer is making, what the employee feels, are false statements about how the employment relationship ended or how the employee performed.

Let’s start with some basics – defamation is the unprivileged publication of a false statement tending to harm the reputation of another person.  The elements necessary to prove defamation are:

  • First, the content of the communication must be false, must contain an assertion of fact, not an opinion; and must reasonably be understood as negative.
  • Second, the communication must be “published” which essentially means that the statement was: (a) written (libel) or spoken (slander), (b) by the employer or its agent(s), (c) to at least one other person (not the plaintiff), and (d) the recipient understood the statement.

Publication occurs when a statement is communicated to any person other than the party defamed.  Publication may occur when one supervisor makes a false statement about the employee to another supervisor (e.g., a statement made by an employee’s former supervisor to his current supervisor that plaintiff had “misused company funds” was found to satisfy the publication requirement.)

  • Third, the employee must show that the statement or conduct referred to him or herself. There is no requirement that the statement refer to the person by name.  A statement “refers” to an employee even if the recipient of the communication mistakenly, but reasonably, understands that the statement was intended to refer to the defamed party.
  • Fourth, intent or “malice” may be required to overcome many of the qualified privileges granted to employers.
  • Finally, the employee must prove that injury occurred because of the communication. Since defamation involves injury to reputation, the employee must show that actual damage has occurred to the esteem that the employee enjoys in his or her community. The one exception is defamation per se where no special damages need be proved.

Asserting and winning a defamation claim from conduct related to the workplace can be quite difficult given numerous privileges and qualifications.

Read more

A recent investigation at Angry Fish Sushi in San Leandro revealed multiple labor law violations that directly impacted workers’ pay and legal protections.

San Leandro Sushi Restaurant Cited for Wage Theft Over Stolen Tips and Unpaid Overtime

Wage theft is a common issue in California’s restaurant industry, where workers may be paid in cash, often rely on tips and work long or irregular hours. A recent investigation at Angry…

READ ARTICLE
In a recent workplace disability discrimination case, the court granted $150,000 to a worker who lost his position after his employer, Catalyst Family, failed to provide basic disability accommodations.

California Child Center Teacher Fired After Asking for Disability Accommodations

Employees with disabilities must receive reasonable workplace accommodations to allow them to perform their work duties and maintain their employment. Unfortunately, workers may face unfair treatment at work; an employer may attempt…

READ ARTICLE
A new lawsuit filed under California’s Private Attorneys General Act accuses the California Basketball Officials Association (CBOA) of misclassifying its instructors as independent contractors.

California Basketball Officials Association Faces Worker Misclassification Lawsuit

Independent contractors or employees? The distinction is more than just a label. It determines whether workers receive crucial labor protections like minimum wage, overtime pay, workers’ compensation and unemployment benefits. Although working…

READ ARTICLE
A California jury awarded a former truck driver $34.7 million after finding that the company falsely accused him of workers’ compensation fraud and wrongfully terminated him, defaming his character.

False Accusations at Work: Lessons from Walmart’s $35 Million Defamation Verdict

Employment defamation can have devastating consequences for workers, leading to lost opportunities, emotional distress and damaged reputations. When false statements are made by an employer, particularly in the context of accusations of…

READ ARTICLE
SEEN ON
cnnmoney
marin-ij
dailypost
news10