First. Was there an actual offer by the company TO Mr. Looman?
Or was he just a candidate for the job?
Next, did Mr. Looman accept the offer? Basically making a contract between him and the company.
If no offer was made, then I would think the company is free to pursue any other candidate that they choose.
If an offer WAS made, then it could be a legal issue of semantics.
The article states Looman signed the offer letter before going to vote;if I were the jury ,he would be awarded damages for wrongful termination unless his actions were specifically and legally prohobited by the employment contract.
Agreed it can be very tricky.
But why blame the engineering company? Mr Looman is some type of engineer. Due to the nature of their work the engineering company may have a policy of not employing any anyone who gets publicity that could be detrimental to the reputation and image of the company.
Could it be that the reporter made false or misleading statements about a man who was detained. A photo was published in addition to the article. A recognizable photo of a man who was only detained? IMHO that is a bit over the top when it comes to reporting.
In his written opinion, Prosecutor William Forsyth said "Looman legally carried his pistol when he went to vote with the gun holstered in plain view at his waist". At that point the prosecutor might have been wise to end his statement. However there was more to his written statement for all to read "But he used “extremely poor judgment” in bringing the gun days after a school shooting in Ohio", Forsyth said. Comparing Ohio to Michigan? Comparing apples and oranges? But the prosecutor just had to say more, “Did he really believe that by carrying a gun into an elementary school that no one would notice and that no one would react?” The prosecutor is running for reelection this fall? Free sound bites and media attention that make a politician look good are priceless.
The police only detained Mr Looman. Yet the prosecutor was involved? It has been almost 40 years since I was detained on a traffic stop, no prosecutor made a lengthy statement about my driving (speeding).
Mr Looman went to exercise his right to vote at a elementary school voting precinct.. I assume there were election judges and school officials present at that location since schools commonly used as places to vote. Just a guess on my part that this was not the first time the elementary school had been used as a place to vote. Could things have been handled better at the voting place-school?
One fact remains Mr Looman did not get the job as an engineer.
Who is to blame? (BTW I am including Mr Looman in that question).
I wholehearted agree with your remark " This could be tricky".
If we see the lawyers circling that might be the first clue.