I am taking a Human Resources course for my BS. Through experience I'm thinking the answer is no, however I don't have any supporting documents or reason for my answer (guestimation).
Law & Ethics - 3 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1
If the company and the individual are both named the individual will be better off with separate counsel, The company is paying his bill and they will throw you under the bus, your atty is supposed to pull you out of the way.
2
Under a great many circumstances, in which both the employer and the employee are named as defendants, the two will share sufficient interests that they can be represented by the same counsel. There are advantages and disadvantages to doing it this way, but I wouldn't be too worried as the employee in this circumstance. By representing me, the lawyer is required to serve my interests. If my interests diverge from the employer's, then the lawyer will send me off to another lawyer. Even where their interests are different, it's usually *good practice* for the employer to cover all or most of the employee's legal fees. However, there's nothing obligatory about it. Sometimes, where the employee's conduct is not beyond reproach and brought unnecessary litigation down upon the employer, the employer will only cover a percentage of the employee's legal fees. Covering 90% of a $10,000 legal bill can still leave the employee with a significant financial burden arising from their conduct. It probably happens that the employee gets left holding the entire tab for his own legals. However, I've never seen it in an action primarily against the employer.
3
It depends. If the employee was sued while performing his official functions or duties then the employer should provide legal representation. The employer would be held responsible, in whole or in part, to the employee's act since it was in pursuance of his duties.
0 comments:
Post a Comment