Breakthrough Career Solutions

html’ >Click Here to Read More .

Defense Firm’s Ouster Sought From Workplace Case After Split Verdict
Joint representation always carries potential conflict, but a bias case argued this week before New Jersey’s high court tests whether, when once-unified parties no longer see eye to eye, their law firm is disqualified from representing any of them. A peculiar aspect of the dispute is that it is the plaintiff’s lawyer who insists on disqualifying the defense firm from representing a company on appeal, where the firm had represented both the company and a supervisor at trial, resulting in a split verdict.

A Rash of Problems Over Job References
Employers are increasingly landing in court over job references, facing lawsuits both for what they said — and didn’t say — about ex-employees. Suits can arise if an employer gives a bad reference, gives a good reference or stays entirely silent. Attorney William Sayegh says he tells employer clients to “give titles, dates and salary only,” because “even a positive letter … can cause a world of hurt.” And many lawyers fear that job-reference litigation will get worse due to the economic downturn.

Employment - ‘Without Prejudice’ Privilege - Victimisation<
> Look Well Into the Future When Career Planning

Although the initial stages of career planning are crucial to success, looking well into the future when career planning is essential if that success is going to be maintained. Careers change, the market changes, the economy changes. If you want to make sure that you remain a hot commodity in your career, you need to make sure that you can roll with the punches.

The best way to look into the future, you must start by looking into the past. What have been the trends of your industry? Where has its competition come from in the past? What companies have survived and which haven’t? Why?

Next, look at the current state of the new industry in which you hope to work and ask the same questions. Choose case studies in the form of major companies. Find out who the key players are in these companies and check out their career path. What did they do after school and entry level positions? Read business journals and check out industry forums online. Where is the current threat coming from? What are people saying about the future of the industry? How will that affect your ability to get a job in your chosen career and keep it five, ten, twenty years down the road?

Now, look at both of these groups of facts and consider your future. What areas will you need to acquire frequent updates on information and skills in order to maintain your position and move up? A certain amount of critical thinking is necessary to prepare yourself for the possible twists and turns of the market as it concerns your chosen career. By assessing the past, taking note of the present, and planning for the future, you will have a much higher chance of not only holding onto your new career but excelling at it as well.
Career Planning Considerations

There are a variety of factors to take into consideration when choosing the path you will take toward a new career. You will need to assess what you already possess in terms of skills, education, and experience that will apply to your new career. Next, you should consider what you need to break into the industry. If you have what it takes to get into the industry or are already there, consider what you will need to move to the position that you want. Knowing yourself, your finances, and the industry youve chosen inside and out is essential to career planning. Here are a few questions to ask yourself.

Do you need a degree, a certificate, or a skill set that you can obtain through a class to succeed in your new career?

If so, do you have the time and money to finance this education? Can you take out loans, take your classes online, or take some time off work to get this education?

Do you need to be certified? If so, a very specific career path has most likely been mapped out and followed. Find out what others in your area have done, where they’ve gone to school, and where to register for the exam to pass your certification. This will save you a considerable amount of time as you research what you need to do.

Are you sure this career is what you want? Is the time and money invested in education and entry level positions worth it to you? Will the job pay enough money to finance the lifestyle you want to live? Are the day to day characteristics of your new career compatible with your temperament and values? Realistically assessing your interests and capabilities could save you years if you are honest and sure that you are choosing your new career for the right reasons.

In the case of Vaseghi and another v. Brunel University and another 2006, the employees made separate complaints of race discrimination and claimed compensation against their employer. Settlement discussions began before an initial set of tribunal hearings in 2004, however, no settlement was reached.

Following the initial hearings, the employer released a quarterly newsletter which outlined that it was spending a large amount of money on defending employment claims. It made particular reference to two tribunal hearings which had cost in excess of ?60,000. It also criticised employees and the trade union for pursuing unfounded allegations and making unwarranted demands for money. The two employees lodged grievances in response to the newsletter. They claimed the following:

* The employer had initiated the attempts at settlement;

* The employer had raised the prospect of financial settlement; and

* The newsletter had amounted to victimisation.

The grievance committee heard oral evidence on the discussions between the parties in their attempts to reach a settlement, however, it was decided that the grounds for the grievance had not been established. The employees then began new tribunal proceedings.

At the new hearings the employer challenged the admissibility of the evidence relied upon before the grievance committee by the employees. The employer argued that the evidence concerning the settlement discussions were protected by ?without prejudice? privilege. The tribunal concluded in favour of the employer, and held that the evidence should have been inadmissible. It should be noted however that the tribunal also held that the references to the discussions in the grievance committee?s report would be admissible. If they were not, the case for the employees would be prejudiced. The employer appealed and the employees cross appealed.

The employer submitted that the references to the discussions in the grievance committee?s report should have benefited from the ?without prejudice? privilege. They argued that the privilege was of more importance than the due administration of justice in relation to putting the case of the employees under severe prejudice.

The employees submitted that they should be allowed to use the references to the discussions in the grievance committee?s report, as that was the only evidence of what happened in the settlement discussions in support of their victimisation claims. They claimed that the allegations of unwarranted demands for money were not supported by what had occurred in the settlement discussions. Therefore, they argued that they should have been able to rely on the settlement discussions, despite them technically being subject to the ?without prejudice? privilege, because there was an overriding public interest in eradicating the evils of victimisation. If they could not rely on the evidence they would not be able to present their case for victimisation.

The employment appeal tribunal held that the employees claims would have been too severely hampered were they not permitted to rely on the settlement discussions as evidence against the allegations that they had not made unwarranted demands for money. The employer, through the publication of the newsletter had brought the matter into the public domain, and subsequently could not rely on the ?without prejudice? privilege. To prevent the employees from relying on the evidence in support of their victimisation claims would have been a clear abuse of a privileged occasion. The eradication of discrimination and victimisation was deemed more important than the protection of the ?without prejudice? privilege. Therefore the appeal was dismissed and the cross appeal allowed.

? RT COOPERS, 2006. This Briefing Note does not provide a comprehensive or complete statement of the law relating to the issues discussed nor does it constitute legal advice. It is intended only to highlight general issues. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to particular circumstances.

everything about career planning resources on the

Popularity: unranked [?]