Can an employee legally offer to give court testimony against her employer?

erudec

Let's pretend I'm tangentially involved in a situation, and I am curious if anyone knows the legal status. Sorry if I have to hold back a lot of (hypothetical) information for (hypothetical) privacy reasons. If you can't say anything without more information, best just close the tab because I won't be able to tell you more. Hopefully I will find people willing to work with what I give.

So she's (hypothetically) working for a company and she's extremely dubious about a service they're charging for. She (hypothetically) strongly suspects the customers are unaware of some serious issues with the service.

She (hypothetically) doesn't know if it's merely dodgy or totally unlawful. She wanted to walk over to the customer and tell them everything, but she was warned that her employer would be able to punish her for that.

She got told that the law requires employees to be loyal to the boss, and that she's legally barred from warning the customer or offering to testify on their behalf.

She's extremely eager to find out if there's any way she can (hypothetically) blow the whistle. There are no legal authorities which regulate the business so the only way for this to come to light is via a customer lawsuit.

Main issue: Is there *any* lawful way for an employee to get in touch with lawyers who might want to sue the employer, without in the process breaching the duty of loyalty to said employer?

I'm sure you have loads and loads of questions about side-issues. I hope you will understand that I'll have to ignore all questions about side-issues until the main issue has been fully explained to me and all doubts clarified.

Mr. Incognito

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/14/enacted/en/html


https://www.per.gov.ie/en/protected-disclosures-i-e-whistleblowing/

FLAC allow you to see a solicitor for free. Contact them for an appointment.

erudec

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/14/enacted/en/html


https://www.per.gov.ie/en/protected-disclosures-i-e-whistleblowing/

FLAC allow you to see a solicitor for free. Contact them for an appointment.

Unfortunately the information you provided isn't what is needed. I've already gone over the whistleblower act and I can tell you that it is seemingly silent on the issue I asked about.

We already know that if the employer punishes her, she can take a case against the employer.

The question, which I believe is not covered by the legislation you linked, is whether an employee can alert a customer that testimony against the employer is available.

The (hypothetical) customer probably doesn't want to sue because she doesn't know that she has a friendly witness within the company. When you are willing to give testimony against your employer, is there a way to let the potential plaintiffs know?

She's tried the FLAC route. The person she spoke to doesn't know what the applicable law might be.

Do you have any idea yourself? Would be delighted to hear what you know, personally.

Mr. Incognito

Sorry

I dont want to get involved personally.

erudec

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Sorry

I dont want to get involved personally.

You're only involved personally if you are not completely anonymous, to be fair.

You're being asked for your personal knowledge, not to get involved. Why post on a thread of a person seeking help if you are not minded to say what you know?

It's up to you if you want to be helpful, but telling me about FLAC is quite rude, as only people who are very ignorant of the law don't know about FLAC already. You seem to have assumed that I would skip the basics like FLAC.

Wheety

What kind of law says the employee has to be loyal to the employer? Only contracts can say that, and they don't supersede the law. If they're doing something illegal, they're doing something illegal.

Can the customers be informed anonymously?

Mr. Incognito

erudec wrote: »

You're only involved personally if you are not completely anonymous, to be fair.

You're being asked for your personal knowledge, not to get involved. Why post on a thread of a person seeking help if you are not minded to say what you know?

It's up to you if you want to be helpful, but telling me about FLAC is quite rude, as only people who are very ignorant of the law don't know about FLAC already. You seem to have assumed that I would skip the basics like FLAC.

Something from your original post and this has confirmed it.

I am not minded to say what I know as I charge for it in real life.

I sent you to somewhere this advice is available for free. You have chosen to become confrontational when I told you I did not want to personally take up your case/ vandetta.

This forum is for a discussion of legal issues. People assist if they can or point people in appropriate directions.

If you have to redact your OP then you are clearly mining for free legal advice in particular circumstances.

I'm not willing to assist that.

erudec

Wheety wrote: »

What kind of law says the employee has to be loyal to the employer? Only contracts can say that, and they don't supersede the law. If they're doing something illegal, they're doing something illegal.

Can the customers be informed anonymously?

Really, years ago I attended a law lecture where the man said "the Tribunal has long held that an employee has a duty of loyalty to his employer".

You can lawfully be sacked for behaviour which the Tribunal finds to be disloyal. I know that already, the question is whether an offer to give testimony constitutes disloyalty.

erudec

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Something from your original post and this has confirmed it.

I am not minded to say what I know as I charge for it in real life.

I sent you to somewhere this advice is available for free. You have chosen to become confrontational when I told you I did not want to personally take up your case/ vandetta.

This forum is for a discussion of legal issues. People assist if they can or point people in appropriate directions.

If you have to redact your OP then you are clearly mining for free legal advice in particular circumstances.

I'm not willing to assist that.

So, to clarify, were you ever willing to give an answer? Or were you just seeking to waste my time for your personal satisfaction, based on your assumptions and prejudices about what you imagine to be up here.

erudec

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Something from your original post and this has confirmed it.

I am not minded to say what I know as I charge for it in real life.

I sent you to somewhere this advice is available for free. You have chosen to become confrontational when I told you I did not want to personally take up your case/ vandetta.

This forum is for a discussion of legal issues. People assist if they can or point people in appropriate directions.

If you have to redact your OP then you are clearly mining for free legal advice in particular circumstances.

I'm not willing to assist that.

Who asked you to butt in with really silly post like the one you offered.

There's absolutely no law against people talking about the law. I am an expert on many things and I charge money for advice.

Unlike you, I am happy to give the advice for free. Maybe other people in my industry would like to form a cartel and prevent me from giving free advice.

That's tough tatties for them, because I don't care what they think, and I will give free advice on the internet as and when I want.

There may be other solicitors who feel the way I do, and frankly I don't see how it's your beeswax to interfere if a lawyer wants to tell me things or I want to tell her.

Your authority to command silence doesn't extend to me. Remember that.

Mr. Incognito

erudec wrote: »

So, to clarify, were you ever willing to give an answer? Or were you just seeking to waste my time for your personal satisfaction, based on your assumptions and prejudices about what you imagine to be up here.

Yeah- I'm out.

Good luck with the thread.

erudec

daheff wrote: »

. So suggesting FLAC would be a good first point.

I must disagree. How on Earth is it appropriate to just blindly assume that I am so incredibly ignorant that I don't know about FLAC already?

It was an insult, intended as an insult.

Here's a useful fact: unless the person is a refugee or extremely uneducated, they know that all developed countries have a free legal aid system.

Do I seem like I belong to one of those categories? If not, just assume that the person knows about free legal aid, and free legal aid is therefore rarely likely to be useful advice.

Suggestions of FLAC are, I would suggest, a form of trolling and should be avoided unless you are dealing with a person who is absolutely a stranger to modern life, or who has emerged from a long coma.

ohnonotgmail

erudec wrote: »

Who asked you to butt in with really silly post like the one you offered.

There's absolutely no law against people talking about the law. I am an expert on many things and I charge money for advice.

Unlike you, I am happy to give the advice for free. Maybe other people in my industry would like to form a cartel and prevent me from giving free advice.

That's tough tatties for them, because I don't care what they think, and I will give free advice on the internet as and when I want.

There may be other solicitors who feel the way I do, and frankly I don't see how it's your beeswax to interfere if a lawyer wants to tell me things or I want to tell her.

Your authority to command silence doesn't extend to me. Remember that.

You have absolutely no way of knowing if anybody posting here is a lawyer or not and you cannot rely on any advice given here. You were pointed towards FLAC. That is a good starting point for you. Nobody is going to answer about a specific case no matter how clumsily try to portray it as a hypothetical.

Lenar3556

erudec wrote: »

Let's pretend I'm tangentially involved in a situation, and I am curious if anyone knows the legal status. Sorry if I have to hold back a lot of (hypothetical) information for (hypothetical) privacy reasons. If you can't say anything without more information, best just close the tab because I won't be able to tell you more. Hopefully I will find people willing to work with what I give.

So she's (hypothetically) working for a company and she's extremely dubious about a service they're charging for. She (hypothetically) strongly suspects the customers are unaware of some serious issues with the service.

She (hypothetically) doesn't know if it's merely dodgy or totally unlawful. She wanted to walk over to the customer and tell them everything, but she was warned that her employer would be able to punish her for that.

She got told that the law requires employees to be loyal to the boss, and that she's legally barred from warning the customer or offering to testify on their behalf.

She's extremely eager to find out if there's any way she can (hypothetically) blow the whistle. There are no legal authorities which regulate the business so the only way for this to come to light is via a customer lawsuit.

Main issue: Is there *any* lawful way for an employee to get in touch with lawyers who might want to sue the employer, without in the process breaching the duty of loyalty to said employer?

I'm sure you have loads and loads of questions about side-issues. I hope you will understand that I'll have to ignore all questions about side-issues until the main issue has been fully explained to me and all doubts clarified.

Hi OP,
It is of significance here that the employee owes a duty of loyalty to his or her employer. He/She may have significant contractual obligations also.

Contacting a customer of her employer, alleging that a service the firm provides is dodgy is likely not a good idea. Outside of this, it really depends on the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. Would it constitute a criminal offence that could be referred to the Garda for investigation? I gather not from your post?

An employer couldn’t prevent an employee attending court as a witness, and providing truthful evidence if they were summonsed - but approaching the customer and volunteering is a different matter and I suggest caution here.

I am not sure what the employees motivation is in all of this, have they been disadvantaged? Or is it more ethical objections? A visit to a solicitor will provide much clarity to the invididual involved.

erudec

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Hi OP,
It is of significance here that the employee owes a duty of loyalty to his or her employer. He/She may have significant contractual obligations also.

Contacting a customer of her employer, alleging that a service the firm provides is dodgy is likely not a good idea. Outside of this, it really depends on the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. Would it constitute a criminal offence that could be referred to the Garda for investigation? I gather not from your post?

An employer couldn’t prevent an employee attending court as a witness, and providing truthful evidence if they were summonsed - but approaching the customer and volunteering is a different matter and I suggest caution here.

I am not sure what the employees motivation is in all of this, have they been disadvantaged? Or is it more ethical objections? A visit to a solicitor will provide much clarity to the invididual involved.

It's an interesting gap in the law, isn't it? The state is there to punish lawbreaking, and good citizens are usually encouraged to come forward to notify the state of lawbreaking, but here's a situation where the law seems to require silence from a witness related to wrongdoing.

If a private company is ripping me off, what you are saying is the law says that an employee of the company is barred from warning me about it and offering to give testimony.

It's sort of a pro-corruption device to make life easier for corrupt businesses.

ANXIOUS

What type of industry? My reading of it is something like client is nursing home is being charged for something dressed up that isn't actually what they are getting.

erudec

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Hi OP,
It is of significance here that the employee owes a duty of loyalty to his or her employer. He/She may have significant contractual obligations also.

Contacting a customer of her employer, alleging that a service the firm provides is dodgy is likely not a good idea. Outside of this, it really depends on the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. Would it constitute a criminal offence that could be referred to the Garda for investigation? I gather not from your post?

An employer couldn’t prevent an employee attending court as a witness, and providing truthful evidence if they were summonsed - but approaching the customer and volunteering is a different matter and I suggest caution here.

I am not sure what the employees motivation is in all of this, have they been disadvantaged? Or is it more ethical objections? A visit to a solicitor will provide much clarity to the invididual involved.

Forget about the specifics, are there any situations where an employee is permitted to make her willingness to give testimony be known, or is it basically impossible to achieve legally?

It's amazing that the duty owed by an employee is so far-reaching.

How else are corrupt businesses to be caught if honest employees are barred from blowing the whistle, one wonders.

I presume we still want to cut down on corruption, but perhaps I'm mistaken.

erudec

ANXIOUS wrote: »

What type of industry? My reading of it is something like client is nursing home is being charged for something dressed up that isn't actually what they are getting.

Does it matter what industry?

Me, if a person thinks her employer is acting dodgy, I want freedom of speech for that employee to speak to the customer to give warnings.

It's a careful balancing act, but the status quo protects lawbreaking customers from the danger of lawsuits and I don't think we're an honest enough country to allow that sort of carry on.

Obviously it could cause issues with employees who mistakenly or maliciously blow the whistle, but ultimately, far more damage can be done by corrupt employers than correct employees, so we need to err on the side of giving immunity to whistleblowers.

GM228

erudec wrote: »

Really, years ago I attended a law lecture where the man said "the Tribunal has long held that an employee has a duty of loyalty to his employer".

Correct, under common law there are long standing implied duties of loyalty and fidelity and mutual trust and confidence in all employment contracts. These are part of the mutual Fiduciary Duties originating from the law of agency.

ANXIOUS

erudec wrote: »

Does it matter what industry?

Me, if a person thinks her employer is acting dodgy, I want freedom of speech for that employee to speak to the customer to give warnings.

It's a careful balancing act, but the status quo protects lawbreaking customers from the danger of lawsuits and I don't think we're an honest enough country to allow that sort of carry on.

Obviously it could cause issues with employees who mistakenly or maliciously blow the whistle, but ultimately, far more damage can be done by corrupt employers than correct employees, so we need to err on the side of giving immunity to whistleblowers.

Yes, it matters what industry. If it's finance the CBI have a number you can call to discuss whistle blowing, if it's a nursing home you've hiqua.

erudec

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Yes, it matters what industry. If it's finance the CBI have a number you can call to discuss whistle blowing, if it's a nursing home you've hiqua.

Yeah, it's not one of the industries with a dedicated state inspection regime that I am thinking about.

But if it was, that's definitely what I would say too.

Ireland's got plenty of unregulated business sector work going on. So the only way for a person in an unregulated industry to blow the whistle is to violate the duty of loyalty and fidelity.

It's not the first time the law left a gap for corrupt actors to exploit.

erudec

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Hi OP,
It is of significance here that the employee owes a duty of loyalty to his or her employer. He/She may have significant contractual obligations also.

Contacting a customer of her employer, alleging that a service the firm provides is dodgy is likely not a good idea. Outside of this, it really depends on the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. Would it constitute a criminal offence that could be referred to the Garda for investigation? I gather not from your post?

An employer couldn’t prevent an employee attending court as a witness, and providing truthful evidence if they were summonsed - but approaching the customer and volunteering is a different matter and I suggest caution here.

I am not sure what the employees motivation is in all of this, have they been disadvantaged? Or is it more ethical objections? A visit to a solicitor will provide much clarity to the invididual involved.

A visit would also lighten the pocket and it is looking here like that would be pouring it down the proverbial.

At the end of the day it's caveat emptor, and it's not the employee's responsibility to look out for the customer's interests and if the boss's ethics bother a person, that person can move on. She can make a FLAC appointment, or look online to see if the state runs a dedicated inspectorate for the sector.

In general, the options are to do one of the above but whistleblowing direct to the victim offering to testify: probably dodgy and only to be done if a qualified lawyer gives you the green light.

Hopefully this thread will be useful for others in future who face a similar situation. Thanks to all who helped shed light and if I have summed up wrongly, I hope you'll take the time to set me right.

AndrewJRenko

erudec wrote: »

Here's a useful fact: unless the person is a refugee or extremely uneducated, they know that all developed countries have a free legal aid system.

Do I seem like I belong to one of those categories? If not, just assume that the person knows about free legal aid, and free legal aid is therefore rarely likely to be useful advice.

Suggestions of FLAC are, I would suggest, a form of trolling and should be avoided unless you are dealing with a person who is absolutely a stranger to modern life, or who has emerged from a long coma.

Actually, the country's free legal aid system is the Legal Aid Board, not FLAC. FLAC is a voluntary service. So everyone doesn't know everything about these services already?


But anyway, your most practical option is to get a trustworthy journalist on board. It is fairly straightforward to pass information via an anonymous address, that couldn't be traced unless somebody got a Court order.

hullaballoo

Moderator: I don't see why the OP should benefit from the resource provided by this forum nor the good will and expertise of its members.

The charter sets out that "disruptive behaviour is a pattern of behaviour by a user that a moderator deems to be disrupting the forum. It may include consistently rude, impolite, unhelpful, condescending or aggressive posts, amongst other things." Such behaviour is prohibited by the charter.

It further sets out that "there is an expectation that every member endeavours to treat others cordially on this site. This forum is no exception." This is the minimum expected behaviour.

As such, I can see no reason to keep both the resource of the forum and the good will of its members available to the OP.

erudec, do not start any further threads on this forum without advance permission from one of the forum moderators. A list of the forum moderators for the time being can be found at the bottom of the forum main page.