Liability

From an ethical standpoint , at that place is no legal disablement to William s statements made regarding Suzy . While the facts show that the motivation that he had for reservation such statements had to do with the fact that Suzy has been known to be fumbling and abrasive , on that point is no legal undercoat or recourse for such statements . Ethically , this might be a mistake on the part of William due to the fact that he knowingly and willingly misrepresented the skills of Suzy but this is only frequent since the law allows unconvincing embellishments such as personal opinions The reckon would be much different if Suzy actually had a unfinished case for disciplinary reasonsIf Suzy were indeed hired by some opposite association , Widgets cannot be made liable even if the basis of the hiring was the glowing recommendation of William .

The reason for this is that the Supreme Court has allowed slight embellishments as to character that are personal in character because it recognizes the freedom that employees and individuals have with regard to such character judgments . on that point being no other basis but the statements of the supervisor , it cannot be said that William maliciously , to the detriment and damage of the other company recommended Suzy . It must be pointed out , however , that if there is a log of the absences , this can be used against the company to prove that there was factual basis for not bad a favorable recommendationIf , on the other hand , there is a resulting injury or...If you want to get a integral essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper