holding that an employee’s statements about a proposal to merge the state medical college with a public hospital constituted a public concern because “the continued existence of [the medical college] was important to the locality due to the fact that [the medical college] provide[d] health care to area residents” and further reasoning that the “ ‘quality, availability, and cost of health care are among the most important and debated issues of our time’ ”
How later courts described this case
- holding that an employee’s statements about a proposal to merge the state medical college with a public hospital constituted a public concern because “the continued existence of [the medical college] was important to the locality due to the fact that [the medical college] provide[d] health care to area residents” and further reasoning that the “ ‘quality, availability, and cost of health care are among the most important and debated issues of our time’ ”
- holding that a physician-employee’s comments relating to a proposed merger between his employer-medical college and a hospital addressed a matter of public concern, but that his interest in speaking on this issue was outweighed by the interest of the college and its administrators
- holding that the state hospital employee’s statement advocating “that a letter be sent to the Board of Trustees declaring the lack of confidence with [the administrator] was nothing more than an example of the ‘quintessential employee beef of incompetent management”
- finding that medical college’s interest in efficient and effective administration of programs outweighed physician’s interests where physician’s comments “created internal conflict resulting in a departmental upheaval’ ”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MOORE, Circuit Judge,
concurring in the result.
I concur in the result reached by the majority. I would affirm solely for the reasons stated in Part II.D. of the majority opinion. *913 Jackson failed to meet his burden of pointing to evidence showing that his protected speech was a substantial and motivating factor in the non-renewal decision.