are there any laws or regulations that might disallow this sort of 'unofficial' economic bullying?

What you describe so far is not actionable. You have not suffered damages; your MD's statements are inconclusive on whether your continued employment is at risk if you continue your [valid] criticism; and the former employer simply is expressing how he intends to exert his freedom of contract.

In the event that you incur losses resulting from pressure by the former employer, the closest you could get to a viable claim is a theory of tortious interference with relation. From a strictly legal standpoint, your biggest obstacle would be to prove the element of "unjustified [and] intentional interference by the defendant inducing or causing a breach or termination of the relationship", Health Call of Detroit v. Atrium Home & Health Care Services, 706 N.W.2d 843, 849 (2005) (brackets added).

Unjustified interference means "an act that is inherently wrongful or an act that can never be justified under any circumstances", Knight Enterprises v. RPF Oil, 829 N.W.2d 345, 348 (2013). The problem here is that the old employer is likely to prevail as to justifying its actions. I personally identify myself with your standpoint, but ask yourself whether you as customer would retain a provider under akin circumstances. For instance, would you retain a plumber whose assistant divulges uncomfortable --even if truthful-- information about you? Clearly the more the plumber wants to keep your business, the likelier he is to sacrifice his assistant.

If you wish to resume your legitimate criticism, your best option is to get from your MD a sense of how to proceed. Being upfront will give you a clearer idea than the non-spoken mutual understanding you mention. Meanwhile you have no viable claim (i.e., in court) this time, and it seems unlikely that one of tortious interference would arise if the former employer merely exerts his bargaining power.

are there any laws or regulations that might disallow this sort of 'unofficial' economic bullying?

What you describe so far is not actionable. You have not suffered damages; your MD's statements are inconclusive on whether your continued employment is at risk if you continue your [valid] criticism; and the former employer simply is expressing how he intends to exert his freedom of contract.

In the event that you incur losses resulting from pressure by the former employer, the closest you could get to a viable claim is a theory of tortious interference with relation. From a strictly legal standpoint, your biggest obstacle would be to prove the element of "unjustified [and] intentional interference by the defendant inducing or causing a breach or termination of the relationship", Health Call of Detroit v. Atrium Home & Health Care Services, 706 N.W.2d 843, 849 (2005) (brackets added).

Unjustified interference means "an act that is inherently wrongful or an act that can never be justified under any circumstances", Knight Enterprises v. RPF Oil, 829 N.W.2d 345, 348 (2013). The problem here is that the old employer is likely to prevail as to justifying its actions. I personally identify myself with your standpoint, but ask yourself whether you as customer would retain a provider under akin circumstances. For instance, would you retain a plumber whose assistant divulges uncomfortable --even if truthful-- information about you? Clearly the more the plumber wants to keep your business, the likelier he is to sacrifice his assistant.

If you wish to resume your legitimate criticism, your best option is to get from your MD a sense of how to proceed. Being upfront with your MD will give you a clearer idea than the non-spoken mutual understanding you mention. Meanwhile you have no viable claim (i.e., in court) this time, and it seems unlikely that one of tortious interference would arise if the former employer merely exerts his bargaining power.

are there any laws or regulations that might disallow this sort of 'unofficial' economic bullying?

What you describe so far is not actionable. You have not suffered damages; your MD's statements are inconclusive on whether your continued employment is at risk if you continue your [valid] criticism; and the former employer simply is expressing how he intends to exert his freedom of contract.

In the event that you incur losses resulting from pressure by the former employer, the closest you could get to a viable claim is a theory of tortious interference with relation. From a strictly legal standpoint, your biggest obstacle would be to prove the element of "unjustified [and] intentional interference by the defendant inducing or causing a breach or termination of the relationship", Health Call of Detroit v. Atrium Home & Health Care Services, 706 N.W.2d 843, 849 (2005) (brackets added).

Unjustified interference means "an act that is inherently wrongful or an act that can never be justified under any circumstances", Knight Enterprises v. RPF Oil, 829 N.W.2d 345, 348 (2013). The problem here is that the old employer is likely to prevail as to justifying its actions. I personally identify myself with your standpoint, but ask yourself whether you as customer would retain a provider under akin circumstances. For instance, would you retain a physician whose assistant divulges uncomfortable --even if truthful-- information about you? Clearly the more the physician wants to keep your business, the likelier he is to sacrifice his assistant.

If you wish to resume your legitimate criticism, your best option is to get from your MD a sense of how to proceed or any updates relating to the non-spoken mutual understanding you mention. Meanwhile you have no viable claim (i.e., in court) this time, and it seems unlikely that one of tortious interference would arise if the former employer merely exerts his bargaining power.

are there any laws or regulations that might disallow this sort of 'unofficial' economic bullying?

What you describe so far is not actionable. You have not suffered damages; your MD's statements are inconclusive on whether your continued employment is at risk if you continue your [valid] criticism; and the former employer simply is expressing how he intends to exert his freedom of contract.

In the event that you incur losses resulting from pressure by the former employer, the closest you could get to a viable claim is a theory of tortious interference with relation. From a strictly legal standpoint, your biggest obstacle would be to prove the element of "unjustified [and] intentional interference by the defendant inducing or causing a breach or termination of the relationship", Health Call of Detroit v. Atrium Home & Health Care Services, 706 N.W.2d 843, 849 (2005) (brackets added).

Unjustified interference means "an act that is inherently wrongful or an act that can never be justified under any circumstances", Knight Enterprises v. RPF Oil, 829 N.W.2d 345, 348 (2013). The problem here is that the old employer is likely to prevail as to justifying its actions. I personally identify myself with your standpoint, but ask yourself whether you as customer would retain a provider under akin circumstances. For instance, would you retain a plumber whose assistant divulges uncomfortable --even if truthful-- information about you? Clearly the more the plumber wants to keep your business, the likelier he is to sacrifice his assistant.

If you wish to resume your legitimate criticism, your best option is to get from your MD a sense of how to proceed. Being upfront will give you a clearer idea than the non-spoken mutual understanding you mention. Meanwhile you have no viable claim (i.e., in court) this time, and it seems unlikely that one of tortious interference would arise if the former employer merely exerts his bargaining power.