Erik Moeller wrote:
Additionally, and in consideration of
Employee's covenants in
this agreement, no directory senior officer of Employer or member of
the Board of Trustees
of the Employer will, during the same time period, personally
criticize, ridicule or make any
statement that personally disparages or is derogatory of employee.
- end quote -
I think that's a reasonable definition. I'm sure it could be improved
further. But we should not excuse malicious attacks as a "free speech
issue". They are not; they are simply inappropriate behavior that
nobody associated with the organization should engage in. Furthermore,
as has been pointed out, this agreement works both ways; it protects
both parties to it.
The language you quoted doesn't even remotely restrict itself to
"malicious attacks", though: "personally criticize" covers a much
broader range of things, as does a prohibition on comments that are
"derogatory". Legitimate criticism aired in a calm and constructive
manner of the wrongdoings of a board member or employee would consitute
"personally criticizing" them, though not "maliciously attacking"
them.
If it were narrowed to say something more like: "no [blah blah]...will,
during the same time period, maliciously attack, personally ridicule or
make any statement that personally disparages employee", that would be
more like the summary you gave.
-Mark