There is nothing on my social media account that links me to my employer. If there were I’m sure I’d be hearing about it daily and probably would have been fired a while ago. I am not PC at all. One of my co-workers said I’m only non-PC when on facebook but I set him straight. The only time I am PC is at work and even then I slip sometimes.
As long as the person posting in no way associated himself/herself with the business, then sure, leave them alone.
If that person identifies in any way where they work, then fire them for probably insulting at least half of your business base.
“if they post non-PC opinions online, that’s a basis for firing someone”. Is that interpretation accurate?
That’s the way I see it also, Thank God I am self employed
One of the reasons I closed down my Facebook account.
abortion, homo marriage and drug use is very offensive.
good to know we can fire anyone tweeting support for any of it
When the feds take control of the internet, prepare for the jihad against conservatives.
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. You have a job because your boss let’s you have a job.
Pray tell.
What is the definition of non-PC?
Wouldn’t want to offend anyone unknowingly, yaknow.
Like sheep being led to the slaughter..
Wake-Up America!!!
That is crazy.
Mark of the beast stuff there.
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.
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.
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.
I take it more as "if they post something that causes the company to lose business, that's a basis for firing".
Three times before emailing.
And four times before posting.
Words to live by.