yes, I am
The statement was not made in the name of the organization. But the new joiner made a statement after some media outlets reported news about new senior editorial position the joiner received in that prominent media organization.
1/ first of all, I'd like to know whether I am eligible to/I can sue the organization.
2/ secondly, I am aware that according to the rules and principles of the organization, any public statement or interview made by their employee or person affiliated with them must be agreed or approved by the editorial management
3/ thirdly, detrimental and degrading comments made by a new joiner is being seen as a view of the organization unless the organization publically has made proper statement distancing it from the author of the degrading statement. But they did not made any public statement, which means they share views of their new joiner.
These are the reasons.
Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX your reply.
Yes, I'm OK with continuing to wait for the answer and pls continue your search.
Thank you Nicola,
I am wating and would be ready to reply when Your Expert needs more information.
Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX letting me know.
Yes, I would wish you to continue to search for someone to assist me.
Thank you Nicola for letting me know
Hello, I would like the search to be continued.
Hello, I wish you to continue to search.
The principle of vicarious liability for the acts of employees would only apply if he was an employee and as such he would have had to have actually joined them for you to be able to sue the organization.
I hope this helps.If there are any further points please reply.
He has accepted the job offer and his appointment to a senior post was announced in the Corporation and published in the media. Doesn't this mean that this person has become an employee of the mentioned Corporation?
Not unless he had actually signed the contract of employment or actually started to work. Even if he signed the contract it would only operate from the date the employment was stated to start in the contract terms of vicarious liability.Until that point he is not an employee.
According to UK law "once an offer has been accepted, a binding contract is made".
Doesn't this mean that offeree and offeror have already reached the state of the legally binding obligations?
Moreover, now employees of this corporation accept their contract electronically.
I.e. the email containing job offer and contract, conditions of service, and other enclosed documents such as Editorial Compliance Form and Declaration of Personal Interests are being submitted electronically by one go. And all that work had been done well 1 month before the mentioned above degrading statement has been made.
It can be a very fine line between a job being offered in principle and negotiating and the position where there is a binding contract. It is possible he was bound at that stage even though he had no actually started.What you could do is write a letter before action setting out the claim to the employer and see what comes back.
Shall İ include in this letter my wish to bring the claim against employer for damages to compensate the harm caused to my reputation by the derogatory comments made by their senior employee (recruitee) in media?
Yes ,because then they will be forced to tell you whether he was an employee at the time in order to defend themselves.
I' ve already sent them letter.
They replied that this person was offered the job, but had no contractual relations with the organisation when he made his (derogatory) comment.
But I have the evidence that he had already accepted the job offer when made his comment, i.e. this person was in binding relations with the corporation.
So I am dissatisfied with the reply of this corporation as it has been seen like attempt to keep themselves away from the comments made by the person approved by them for senior job in this organisation.
In this regard, who should judge which party is right (me or corporation) ?
They are saying he had not signed his contract at the stage when he made the statement and so, no vicarious liability.The position would be viewed that he had accepted in principle but not all the details had been agreed and no contract signed.
Doesn't their reply amount to the meaning that the process of accepting the job-offer by mentioned person has not been finished yet?
Or I can put it in different way : Weren't they - the person and the corporation- in binding relations when the comment had been made as the person had accepted the job-offer 1 month before?