Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Alex Putman on September 8, 2008 at 3:53pm

I look up this term and here is what I found:

Tortuous interference is the unlawful interference into one’s contractual or business affairs. For example, someone who uses the web to defame an individual’s business and contacts their customers (or prospective customers) may be violating this law. A special case of tortuous interference called “Tortuous Interference with Prospective Advantage” is available in some states to punish those who seek to damage one’s ability to find and retain new customers.

It would not appear that this falls into the area you are asking about. She does have the right to open the email. I don't think I would be too concerned, but it never hurts to ask your legal counsel (if available) what all this entails.

Welcome to the site!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Maureen Sharib on September 8, 2008 at 3:57pm

Electronic trails always open you up to nonsense like this.
She's threatening you w/out cause which should in itself be against the law if it's not.
Like Alex said, consult an attorney to put your mind at ease.
And...learn how to telephone source!

;)
More here and here and here.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason on September 8, 2008 at 4:18pm

Thank you for your replies. I was looking this term up on the web as well and I see a few cases that pertained to this matter that went in favor of the plaintiff and defendant. It mainly dealt with what you stated Alex, former employees taking away business and/or proprietary information and not necessarily with the direct recruitment of said employees.

Yeah I telephone source all the time as well but when I can't get a hold of them I will email them. This is really the only negative reply I ever got from my emailing campaigns and hopefully my last one, yeah right. =) Thanks again for your replies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sean C. on September 8, 2008 at 4:23pm

"Dear President (name),

From one professional to another, I would like to sincerely thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my email. As I'm sure you know, this email was not intended for you. I apologize for engaging this correspondence, as I was not aware that this individual was no longer employed with your company. However, my firm and I are confident that no laws were breached as a result, and there exists no pending liability in this case. In addition, I would like to point out that threatening legal action with no basis makes you appear a bluffing, foolhearty bitch. Again, thank you for your time and have a pleasant day.

Sincerely, Jason

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Maureen Sharib on September 8, 2008 at 4:30pm

"...a bluffing, foolhearty bitch."

OFF with her head!

LOL!
(I just couldn't help myself.)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason on September 8, 2008 at 10:24pm

Funny, I think I am going to send this to her right now. Think her response might be favorable?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sean C. on September 9, 2008 at 11:59am

Most people don't respond favorably to having their bluff called. Off with her head!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Pickthorne on September 28, 2008 at 2:23pm

I actually had a nasty experience in this area a couple of years ago which I think is relevant.

I hired a recruiter who had a non compete agreement with their current firm. The restriction was that the person couldn't do legal recruitment in DC and we were an IT firm with no intention of working in the legal field.

His ex employer sued him regardless because she wanted to punish him for leaving even though it was clear that he wasn't breaking his non-compete. My company was also sued for Tortuous Interference.

It was an ugly, messy, distracting and expensive situation to deal with. Despite it not being fair, we still had to fight it and it cost us $10,000 to solve.

I would advise caution in sourcing again from this company as they don't have to be legally right to sue, they just nee the money and will power to cause you to respond to the suit.

I hope this helps.

Paul Pickthorne.
Smuz.com - 100% Free Job Board

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Durbin on October 9, 2008 at 1:46pm

I've had about a half dozen lawsuits threatened against me since starting my business - only one of them went so far as to actually say they were going to sue.

The rule of thumb, given to me by my uncle, is to ignore everything until you actually get a letter from a lawyer. Business people threaten lawsuits all the time, but the expense is usually not worth it, and tortuous interference is a joke - everyone always throws it out.

The best bet is not to rile the person up. Ignore their e-mail (though you should archive it), and continue on your merry way until someone actually files suit.

If businesses could stop us from headhunting at their firms, none of us would be in business. Something to keep in mind - it's generally not bad to pay a lawyer $500-$1000 to be on retainer should ever need one quickly. But there's no reason to do anything but laugh in this case.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Gorman on October 14, 2008 at 1:52pm

Alex is correct. A one off email or phone call won't qualify. Also, while you didn't mention it, if the candidate originally contacted you and used his or her company's phone number or email it's reasonable for you to have responded in kind.

As an employer, I've had to make this call to agencies that show signs of "raiding" e.g. repeated calls. Personally I could care less, as I view it the company's responsibility to have an environment where employees aren't interested in such calls, but of course I need to comply with my firm's wishes. A phone call to the agency is usually sufficient. In the rare times it's been a real issue, then of course you turn loose the lawyers. Which again, one letter puts a stop on it. My preferred method is turn my recruiters loose on the counterparty and have at it.

While in this day anyone can sue anyone for just about anything, I've never seen nor heard of one of these situations going anywhere legally. Again, don't lose sleep over it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Weidner on October 14, 2008 at 2:08pm

My understanding is that unless you are specifically targeting the company and have pulled out a number of candidates that could be detrimental to the target company you have nothing to worry about. You can't specifically target a company with the intent of doing harm or intent of interfering with their normal course of business. Just lay off them for a while. I would not antagonize this person further with additional calls or emails. Walk away take a hire road, call the next candidate on the list.

As far as the email, companies have the right to reivew all email, they own the software, the hardware and the network, therefore they own what's on it. She was not in violation of any law I'm aware of. However she might have been in violation of company policy, if one exists but I doubt it as the person was no longer employed there.

JW

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam M on November 22, 2008 at 3:52pm

I soo that reply. I do hope jason sends it!

Sean C. said:

"Dear President (name),

From one professional to another, I would like to sincerely thank you for taking the time to read and respond to my email. As I'm sure you know, this email was not intended for you. I apologize for engaging this correspondence, as I was not aware that this individual was no longer employed with your company. However, my firm and I are confident that no laws were breached as a result, and there exists no pending liability in this case. In addition, I would like to point out that threatening legal action with no basis makes you appear a bluffing, foolhearty bitch. Again, thank you for your time and have a pleasant day.

Sincerely, Jason

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion