Today, during lunch at Arby’s, I saw a story about someone getting fired because of something they said online. Sure, there are PLENTY of these stories and I’ve written on this subject from a job-seeker’s point of view in the past. This one is a little different.
This time, the comments the employees were terminated for were said in a password protected area of MySpace. Granted, it seems the employer’s legal team has shaped their story well enough at this point to cover their asses, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on whether making a concerted effort to keep conversations private online should protect you from legal action. Is there such a thing as a private conversation online? Is a password protected myspace conversation any different than a conversation via email? If an employer knowingly reads communications they know weren’t meant for them, does that put them at risk?
John,
Don’t want to re-cover anything that’s been discussed before, but as a restaurant professional, I both monitor and have to watch myself in this regard. To answer your question(s) though, how many times do we have to see this sort of thing before we realize that there is no such thing as a private conversation on the internet? Does the existence of a password give an additional expectation of privacy? I think so, but it’s still far short of a guarantee. I think if it exists in a permanent, printable space like an email, I think that’s the standard that should be applied, though I’m not sure where the law is on that, at this point.
Here’s a perspective/feeling that I’m suprised to have… as an employer/manager, if you hear that something like this is going on (i doubt this is a case of spying, like the caption above says) and someone is willing to give you access, you have to take it… you have to know if someone is subverting your business or your customers in some way. The restaurant business creates some very stressful moments, and on those occassions, you have to be able to trust your people to act in a way that’s best for the business and its guests. I actually hope that the employer in this case is not found liable in any way, as they have to be able to act in the business’ best interest and remove an untrustworthy employee, regardless of the manner in which the employee’s misdeeds were discovered.
TM
Great comment Thomas! I have to think that if I were an employer, I’d want to discuss the issues with an employee once I discovered them. I’d like to believe that my reaction wouldn’t be straight to termination.
Perhaps they do have real issues. Perhaps the issue is the fact that they obviously don’t feel safe raising the issues through the proper channels.
There are a lot of ways to deal with employees who are not happy. This way does send a certain message… but I’m not sure it is the message of a place I’d want to work.
John,
Good counterpoint. One of the things that I’ve found disturbing over my tenure in restaurants is the assumption that high turnover is ‘normal’ and a ‘fire-first, ask questions later’ mentality that is far too prevalent and can lead to an every person for his/herself environment. And, sadly, a restaurant with a solid concept that manages its costs can still make money even in those conditions. But you’re right, it doesn’t sound like it would make for the best workplace.
I think my initial viewpoint after seeing the clip was that there’s far more than meets the eye here, because losing a restaurant job, particularly as a server or line cook, for most people doesn’t inspire the angst or anger that intensifies to the point of legal action and the general complaining of a small group of staff wouldn’t even attract the attention of a management team. In this case it seems that something got personal and then it went too far. Proper channels may have never even been considered and that too would be sad.
Pulling back a little, taking my restaurant hat off, this story could have taken place anywhere. CNN isn’t interested in the employer/employee relationship within this particular industry, they want a ‘hot’ social media story, with a little first amendment and invasion of privacy tossed in for flavor. On that level, I think the story and claimant’s prospects are pretty weak. The internet by its very nature is public and while standards are in place to keep our most sensitive information private and secure, I’m not sure any court is looking to extend such protection to a message board, password or not.
Sorry for the enormous comments, all this tweeting has my fingers begging for some long-form action! -TM
No, no! Write away! This is a good discussion. Thanks so much for taking your time to share that with us.
My favorite line in the video is “The law and the courts don’t really know how to handle this, and it’s not like they’ll catch up!”.
By the way, what is your twitter user name?
“There has to be some sacred space in our lives, where we can be comfortable speaking our minds.”
Doreen Morino’s last comment in the interview really struck me. Interesting choice of words. Does the sacred still fit into the secular these days? But I gotta go with TM, I think CNN is stirring the social media pot — “Is it soup yet?” “Needs a little more seasoning…”
I think the sacred space is the same place it has been forever… but even the local bar has its risks.