Oh yeah, that clears everything up. There's a simple whistleblower doctrine out there looking for a home, but it can't be found in this case. This thing muddies the waters so much that neither law enforcement, the administration, nor witnesses to wrongdoing have any guidence whatsoever.
How much do these legal scholars get paid again?
So let me get this straight. If your job requires you to point out wrongdoing, you can get fired despite your freedom of speech rights if you point out something your government boss doesn't approve of. BUT if you come across wrongdoing outside the scope of your duties, and pointing such out isn't within your job description, you can blast away with impunity.
Wait a minute. I'm giving this a second look in my head and it's starting to make sense.
If your job is "whistleblowing" and you don't do that job as your superior desires, they have the right to terminate you, despite any first amendment protections. Your employer deems the way you did your job inappropriate.
There's something there. You don't have to reach the underlying issue of whether the wrongdoing was actually wrong. This is a process over substance issue.
Oh yeah, that clears everything up. There's a simple whistleblower doctrine out there looking for a home, but it can't be found in this case. This thing muddies the waters so much that neither law enforcement, the administration, nor witnesses to wrongdoing have any guidence whatsoever.
How much do these legal scholars get paid again?
So let me get this straight. If your job requires you to point out wrongdoing, you can get fired despite your freedom of speech rights if you point out something your government boss doesn't approve of. BUT if you come across wrongdoing outside the scope of your duties, and pointing such out isn't within your job description, you can blast away with impunity.
It just seems counterintuitive.
Wait a minute. I'm giving this a second look in my head and it's starting to make sense.
If your job is "whistleblowing" and you don't do that job as your superior desires, they have the right to terminate you, despite any first amendment protections. Your employer deems the way you did your job inappropriate.
There's something there. You don't have to reach the underlying issue of whether the wrongdoing was actually wrong. This is a process over substance issue.