Sharing work habits on social media can be risky for employees as well. While employees need a place to vent, and social media has become the new "water cooler", they should keep in mind that whatever they say may be seen by current and future employers. If you're looking for a new job and a search of you online comes up with a lot of complaints and whining you did about your current job, chances are you won't be hired. Keep in mind, whatever you put online now will remain online for a long, long time. Also, if you're slacking off, doing something illegal, or stealing from your company and you post it online, chances are someone in your company will eventually see it and there will be consequences.
If there are poor conditions at a workplace, or something shady going on, I think employees have every right to post that online for the world to see. But in these times of government regulation, there seems to be less need for "whistle blowing". If an employee is not happy with something at their job, they have every right to go out and find a different job, or go through proper channels at their company.
The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 protects most negative things you might say about your boss or company on social media under certain circumstances. But it's complicated. I do believe in an employees freedom of speech, be it on social media or in person. The National Labor Relations Board says "workers have a right to discuss work conditions freely and without fear of retribution, whether the discussion takes place at the office or on Facebook."
In an interesting article from Forbes, titled "When Is It OK To Diss Your Boss Online?", (written by Susan Adams), Daniel P. O'Meara, chairman of the employment law division of a Philadelphia based law firm explains a quirk of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935; managers and supervisors are not afforded the same protections as employees, because the statute is meant for employees who are trying to improve their working conditions. So, a salesperson who is not a supervisor would be protected by the NLRA but a supervisor would not. And really, if you have a gripe about your supervisor and you post all over social media about it, you better understand your rights before you do so. Employment lawsuits are becoming more common in recent years
In 2009, six employees at the Hampton, Virginia Sheriff's Office got fired after "liking" and commenting on the Facebook page of their bosses' opponent in an upcoming election. However, U.S. Circuit Judge William Traxler found that "liking" something on the social network site was the same as displaying a political sign in your front yard, an act the Supreme Court had ruled protected speech. Earlier a Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled the opposite way on the case, saying liking a Facebook page was "insufficient speech to merit constitutional protection."
The Ethics Resource Center (ERC) "the oldest non-profit organization in the U.S. dedicated to independent research and advancement of high ethical standards and practices in both public and private institutions.", has produced a National Business Ethics Survey since 1994, gathering information about employees' perspective of ethics in the workplace. A 2013 report concludes "active social networkers show a higher tolerance for activities that could be considered unethical." I find this statement questionable at best. Especially since their classification of "active social networker" was a person who spends 30% or more of their work day participating on various social network sites. This seems like a ridiculous group to survey for such a thing, those people aren't really "working" 30% of the time, and this survey only included 2089 workers in U.S. companies. I have searched the internet for other studies on this, and was unable to find more data. If you know of any, please leave a link in the comments below.
The best way I can see to handle the changing landscape of social media is for a company to have a very specific social media policy and for employees to be aware of it and sign a contract agreeing to abide by it. This protects both the employer and employee. A good example of a company who put this practice in place is Apple.
If you are an employee or a potential employee, you have the right to agree to this or not agree to this.
As for whether a company has a right to know your social media passwords, if you are not representing the company online, (as far as if you are personally blogging or Tweeting), or not using company property to do so, I don't believe they have a right to your passwords. I think this falls under privacy. As in what you do on your own time is none of their business, as long as it is not a reflection on their company. This does bring up a lot of ethical questions. What if the company doesn't agree with your politics, as in the case of the Virginia Sheriff's office listed above? What if they disagree with your religion, and you are passionately blogging about those subjects on your own time? My opinion is, if you are doing so in a personal capacity, it is none of their business.
I do believe that this is an important topic, as with everything involving social media, it is changing rapidly. Companies would do best to keep abreast of these changes and adapt company policy accordingly. Employees need to know their rights and responsibilities, and their employers expectations. It's a pretty grey area, but if everybody is careful, no one should get hurt.
What are your thoughts on this? Please comment below and let me know what you think!
No comments:
Post a Comment