Legal ramifications of misrepresentation of coworkers and managers in the workplace

When a manager physically misrepresents themselves by way of another manager with regard to subordinate employees. Example: one manager asks an employee if they have met a new manager, to which the employee responds, "no." The manager then introduces the employee to the alleged 'new manager' whose actual physical appearance is not representative of the actual person who never identified themselves as 'the new manager.' In this example, let's say that the alleged new manager actually looks one way, but is wearing a disguise that makes them appear as if they are another person entirely disrupting the ability to physically recognize supposed coworkers and managers.

This scenario describes an extreme and highly unusual form of physical/identity misrepresentation in the workplace, where one or more managers orchestrate or participate in a deliberate deception: introducing a disguised person as the "new manager" to a subordinate employee who has not previously met the actual individual. The disguise alters the person's appearance so completely that normal physical recognition of coworkers or managers is impossible, and the real new manager is not involved or identified as such.

Such conduct goes far beyond verbal or written misrepresentation (as discussed previously) into impersonation or false personation, which triggers potential criminal and civil liability. This is not standard or protected workplace behavior. Below is a general overview under U.S. law (which varies significantly by state). This is not legal advice—outcomes depend on specific facts (intent, jurisdiction, any resulting harm or benefit, and evidence like witness statements, communications, or video). Consult an employment attorney, HR professional, or law enforcement immediately if this is a real situation.

Potential Criminal Liability (False Personation / Criminal Impersonation)

Most states criminalize falsely assuming another's identity or role, especially when done to deceive others, gain a benefit, or cause harm. The disguise strengthens the case by making the impersonation credible and intentional.

• Key Elements Typically Required (example from common statutes like California Penal Code § 529):

  • Falsely personating another person (or assuming an official/private capacity, such as "the new manager").

  • In that assumed character, performing an act that could:

    • Cause the impersonated person (the real new manager) to face liability, suit, or obligation.

    • Provide a benefit to the impersonator or others (e.g., gaining the subordinate's trust, extracting information, testing reactions, or advancing a hidden agenda).

    • Obligate the subordinate (or company) in some way.

  • Intent to deceive is usually central.

• Penalties: Often a misdemeanor or felony, with fines (up to $10,000+ in some states), jail (up to 1 year), or prison time, depending on harm caused and whether it's charged as a felony. Repeat or aggravated cases (e.g., if confidential information is obtained) escalate penalties.

• Federal Angle (limited applicability): 18 U.S.C. § 912 prohibits false personation of a U.S. officer or employee acting under federal authority (up to 3 years imprisonment). This rarely applies to private-sector managers unless the workplace involves federal contracts, government entities, or crosses into federal jurisdiction.

• Relevance to Your Example:

  • Introducing the disguised person as "the new manager" and having the subordinate interact with them (believing it is authentic) can satisfy the "act in assumed character" element.

  • If the subordinate relies on this (e.g., follows instructions, shares sensitive work details, or alters their behavior), it could constitute obtaining a benefit or causing potential harm/liability to the real manager or company.

  • Pure pranks or "tests" without further deceptive acts are less likely to be prosecuted but can still lead to police reports or internal investigations. If the disguise is used to secretly observe, record, or manipulate subordinates, it edges closer to fraud, harassment, or privacy violations.

Analogous cases involve impersonating officials, employees, or professionals to deceive others (e.g., fake references, scam "managers," or undercover tests that go too far). Disguise itself isn't illegal, but using it for purposeful deception in an employment context often is when combined with the elements above.

Civil Liability (Torts Against the Subordinate)

The subordinate (or affected employees) could sue the involved managers personally and/or the employer (under vicarious liability, as managers act within the scope of employment).

• Fraudulent (or Intentional) Misrepresentation / Deceit:

  • False representation of a material fact ("This is the new manager" when it is not, reinforced by disguise).

  • Knowledge of falsity (or reckless disregard).

  • Intent to induce reliance by the subordinate.

  • Justifiable reliance (subordinate reasonably believes the introduction).

  • Resulting damages (e.g., emotional distress from betrayal/confusion, professional harm if actions based on the "new manager" lead to errors, lost trust in chain of command, or career impacts).

• Other Related Torts:

  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): If the conduct is "extreme and outrageous" (a full disguise to fool subordinates about core management identity could qualify, especially if repeated or malicious).

  • False Light Invasion of Privacy or Intrusion Upon Seclusion: Portraying a false scenario that places the subordinate in a misleading position, or using disguise for covert observation.

  • Negligent Misrepresentation: If the deception was reckless rather than intentional.

Damages could include emotional harm, lost wages (if it leads to resignation or discipline), and punitive damages for malice. Employers are often vicariously liable for managers' actions during work-related activities.

Employment and Workplace Ramifications

• For the Subordinate(s): This could create a hostile or intolerable work environment, supporting claims of constructive discharge (quitting due to unbearable conditions) or retaliation if reported. Subordinates can report internally to HR/compliance without fear of retaliation for good-faith complaints. If it involves protected characteristics or escalates, it might intersect with discrimination/harassment laws.

• For the Involved Managers: Almost certain grounds for immediate termination, as this violates trust, ethics, and likely company policies on honesty, conduct, and chain of command. It exposes the company to lawsuits and reputational damage.

• For the Employer/Company: Vicarious liability for the managers' acts. Could face regulatory scrutiny (e.g., if it affects safety, compliance, or government-related work). Internal policies against fraud, misrepresentation, or unethical testing would be breached.

Factors That Matter Most

• Intent and Context: Security "test," prank, malicious sabotage, or attempt to extract information? Benign intent reduces (but does not eliminate) risk; harm or benefit increases it.

• Reliance and Harm: Did the subordinate actually interact meaningfully or suffer consequences? Minimal interaction with no damages weakens claims.

• Jurisdiction: State laws differ (e.g., California has detailed false personation rules; others fold it into general fraud or identity theft statutes). Federal claims are narrow.

• Evidence: Emails, witnesses to the introduction, photos/video of the disguise, or records of subsequent interactions.

In practice, this is rare outside of fiction or extreme "social experiments." Most employers would treat it as gross misconduct warranting firing the perpetrators and reassuring affected staff. If real, the subordinate should document everything (dates, what was said, witnesses), report to HR or higher management, preserve evidence, and consider consulting an attorney or filing a police report if criminal elements are suspected.

This builds on general misrepresentation principles but elevates it due to the physical deception and impersonation elements. If you have more details about the jurisdiction or outcomes experienced, a more targeted analysis is possible.

On This Day in 2026 - 2/24/2026