Posted on 02/25/2015 1:02:10 PM PST by tbw2
What is missing in this discussion is whether the commentator can use his/her real name when making the comment. I believe this could be a problem in a community of readers that know from other sources where the commentator works.
The employee made two fatal mistakes. 1. Posting comments on the company social media site. She should have been fired straightaway. 2. Allowing her employer access to her social media site. She should have quit, and if the basis for firing was a comment on a personal web page with no connection to the business, she should have sued the employer.
Both of these people should not be in business, they don't have a clue.
That's not how I read it. If an employee's personal behavior, to include social media comments cost the company they work for to lose business or receive unwanted negative attention, they can be fired.
Free speech is not freedom from consequences.
If your social media presence can be tied to your employer then what you do there can be tied to them, so then they have reason to make sure you’re not making anybody mad.
If the employee’s comments were on a site like FR, and thus not linked to the employer’s site, does the employer then lose all grounds to monitor and fire?
That leads into the FCC’s attempt to classify the internet as a utility, which gets down to a fairness doctrine / content regulation under obscenity.
The example they gave in this case involved a staffer who started the problem on the BUSINESS facebook page first before migrating to her personal page to carry on which I can see being a no no. The scary thing is though is this lawyer saying it also applies to things just posted strictly on one’s personal page. Not that I would be inclined to post offensive stuff anyways, but now I’m even more glad that I refused to sign up with facebook. If I ever do it will be with only minimal contact info just in case a long lost friend or somebody wanted to locate me. Anything else can and will be used against you.
In TX, yes.
If an employee does not divulge in any way their connection to an employer, then I don’t see that the employer can take action short of an employee admitting to the commission of a felonious act. If the employer can monitor and regulate the behavior of their employees away from the workplace, then we are into new territory.
Can your employer fire you for going to church? What about for advocating the arming of teacher and other staff at public schools? What if you run a Tea Party web site?
The last sentence in this article says that the boss of this travel agency now monitors her employees’ FB pages. Is allowing employer access to one’s social media a condition of employment there? I’d say no to that. An employer who wants to supervise the public and private utterances of her employees is a micromanaging control freak and must be a nightmare to work for.
A wise decision.
I don’t have Facebook, so when my employer asked to see it, I honestly said I didn’t have a Facebook account.
Linkedin versus Freerepublic versus other social media are all separate.
I’m glad Freerepublic exists. I can discuss political matters and it isn’t linked to work and so forth. But employers are pushing more and more on the political correctness, where giving non-PC opinions is forbidden by HR because it is “sexist, homophobic, etc”.
At work, a woman whose husband had come out as gay was seeking advice on what to do. He wanted to have the cake both ways, stay married to her and live together with her and the kids but have sex on the side.
Most people said it was so wonderful that he could finally be himself, referred her to a support group for the straight spouses of gays, etc. She was clearly conflicted and upset.
I said treat it as you would any other request to commit adultery. If he said he wanted to sleep with another woman and you wouldn’t put up with it, talk to a divorce attorney now. If you’d tolerate him cheating on you, then it doesn’t matter with whom, but get STD testing and put limits on it.
She didn’t “turn me in”, but someone else reported me to HR as homophobic.
Saying that my answer would have been common sense meant nothing to them.
My only defense was that I gave her the same advice for a man cheating with a man as I would a man cheating with another woman - and would give the same advice if a man said his wife wanted to cheat on him.
My opinion of transgenders, Social Justice Warriors and so forth are FAR more inflammatory, and that prior incident almost cost me my job. If I were a man, I would have been fired.
I take it more as "if they post something that causes the company to lose business, that's a basis for firing".
One common feature in all the cases mentioned is that the person obviously connected themselves with the business since they cost the company customers.
Three times before emailing.
And four times before posting.
Words to live by.
On FB, if you are going to be honest about your opinions on anything, you need to either have privacy settings set at maximum or use a sort of quasi real FB name or some handle that your employer cannot identify. I think technically employers can fire someone or refuse to hire them simply because they said they are a fan of a sports team or musician that their employer dislikes. And even if you were to try to get your job back over that there could be all kinds of major hassles.
What a person does at work, on company sites, or where seen/heard/read by the company’s customers and prospective customers is of concern to the company. I recently fired a consultant who tripped up on this.
Now, do I care or do I want anyone looking at my personal stuff outside of work? Do I want to know theirs? No, none of anyone else’s business. I cannot believe that people would share their personal accounts with a company. An incredibly stupid invasion of privacy. I’ve got to think, as well, that at some point a company will get sued big time for firing someone for their purely non-business thoughts and activities that were not shared or available at work. If the company seeks this out, they should be liable for actions taken as a result.
I stay away from Facebook because there isn’t any privacy. Same with sites asking for Facebook account to participate. LinkedIn is great but a separate life from my personal views and activities.
The real problem with all of this is the incentive to be anonymous. This is bad in long run and why there is so much BS on the Internet. People should write with their name, be accountable for their words and actions. But alas, idiots can’t handle people saying non-PC things. We need new definition of PC and need an era of tolerance.
At the end of the day, in my opinion, what you write on your own time is your own business. If it becomes a issue at work, fine, but otherwise, none of the business’ business.
Then again, would I fire someone because they support Obama?
“I live in a “Right to WOrk” state which means that all employment is at will and your employer can fire you for any or no reason.”
Only white males. Just try firing a black or woman without documentation out the wazoo of each and every offense. Anything less than theft or assault will be met with discrimination lawsuits.
An alleged lawyer claims that there is a duty to take disciplinary action in response to posts “attacking” race, sexual orientation, gender, or religion, and without such consequences the employer can be sued for permitting a hostile environment in that businesses. I hope this guy has a mail-order degree and no knowledge. Otherwise, America is in deep trouble.
Any pansy who is so traumatized by a Christian quoting on Facebook/Twitter/whatever what the Bible says about homosexuality is too delicate to be permitted out in the world. Any loser who is so invested in his skin color that he breaks into tears - because someone, somewhere posts an Instagram message reflecting archaic racist views that have all but died out except in the democrat party - needs to be protected in a mental institution, not rewarded in a courtroom.
My social media policy with employees, before I shut down my business? Don’t be an idiot while referencing the company. Otherwise, I didn’t care. No one ever complained, but if they had I would have pretended to take it seriously and then fired the complainer if it was frivolous or the other person if I actually cared, but the firing would have been for cause, many weeks later, and with no reference to their Facebook habits or objections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.