Poking one's nose in other people's business is rarely a good idea.
Making the owner aware of alleged offenses is not the third party's
responsibility.
Paul
On Jan 8, 2006, at 4:15 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
The very reason I added that email was to explain that the owner should
simply be made aware of the possibilities. If the owner chose to
immediately terminate the employee, that would to wholly his decision
and he'd have to own it.
In the owner's place, I'd want to current to monitor events.
Jack
--- Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 January 2006 17:10
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Vigilant or Bloody Minded
Making the store owner aware of your information is not a
profession of a known fact. That having been made clear, the
action taken by the owner is not your responsibility.
Jack
Yes it is. The reason for telling the owner appears to be that you
don't
think the guy should be working there, even though he hasn't been
convicted.
So if you tell the employer, and the guy loses his job, it is clearly
a
result of your actions, so it is your responsibility. If he's later
found
not guilty, will you give him another job and compensate him for the
lost
earnings and defamation of character?
If you think it's ok for people to lose their job based on hearsay,
how will
you feel when somebody decides they don't like you, and start telling
your
employer that you're a paedophile?
--
Cheers,
Bob
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
