The following is the Week 6 Response Post for Marist610 Social Media.
Just last Friday, a Yelp employee complained about her wages in a letter to her CEO that she posted online. She was fired a few hours later. Yelp, however, contends she was not fired because of the letter. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued some important decisions in recent years that helped clarify whether and how employers can restrict their employees' social media use.
Colleague Nicole Grosjean posed the question in her recent blog entry about whether her readers agreed with decisions made by the NLRB in 2012 that included rulings such as employers prohibiting employee rants and employers remaining entitled to enforce important workplace policies even in social media contexts. I agree with the NLRB ruling that when employees converse with each other about their workplace conditions, that they are engaging in protected concerted activity. Further, I agree that individual employee rants (when an employee posts inappropriate comments without engaging in conversation with other employees), are not protected.
 |
However, I believe many employers today still either unaware of that distinction, or they are simply in fear because the lines are too blurred. For example, an employee posts what looks like an "individual employee rant" on his Facebook page. But, the next day, his work colleague "likes" his post. Is this now considered engaging in protected concerted activity?
Over the past several years, employers have been warned that discipline of social media rants by their employees is risky due to the NLRB's position on protected concerted activity. I can see why.
Here's a video from Labor Relations Update that discusses and attempts to explain some recent NLRB rulings:
In her post this week, Grosjean also asked us to choose a guideline outlined by either Microsoft, from its 11 tips for social networking safety, or McAfee, from its 15 social media security tips, that we follow well, and one where we need work.
I believe I follow tip 6 from Microsoft which suggests people be selective about who they accept as friends on social media networks. I believe I've become pretty savvy at identifying scammers and identity thieves. I've seen my share of pretty people in stock photos asking me to be their friend. My adivce is to not be naive and simply automatically click "accept." Take some time to look over the profile. If they only have a few friends and/or little content, it's a red flag. If they use poor grammar, it's a red flag. Personally, I automatically delete anyone who I don't know. Sure, it's made for a few awkward moments like the time when I didn't recognize an old college friend, but he got over it.
|
 |
A tip that I don't follow well is McAfee's tip 8, understanding my privacy settings. I need to improve at selecting the most secure options and periodically checking for changes. There are many helpful articles available online including Social Media Examiner's How to Check Social Media Privacy Settings. Plus, I'm always seeing stories on the news, including on the Today Show's Rossen Reports on how to properly set social media privacy settings. I need to make this a top priority. Even Stay Safe Online lists privacy settings as its number one tip in a list of 13.
|
In closing, let me go back to the employee rant and offer a tip. If you're an employee who is angry about something at your work, the best advice is to cool down before logging into your social media accounts. Before you send your message, ask yourself: How will the other side view my comments? Or, ask a friend or trusted colleague to take a look and provide feedback. It's all about empathy. When we listen first, we see things through the other side's lens. It could save you your job. Or it could save you a lot of time in litigation.
I have to say again, I loved that opening image of Donald Trump and his famous "You're Fired!" statement. But it is so true. My sister used to routinely bash things going on at her job on Facebook and I feared for her job security. Especially when I learned she was friends with her boss and her boss' wife. But then that boss left, another one came in, and the business she worked for filed for bankruptcy.
ReplyDeleteAnother tip for seemingly random friend requests, especially on Facebook, is seeing if you have any friends in common. I've had friends of family members add me because they see that I play the same games as the family member I know. Of course, because they are not someone I know I don't recognize their name. But even with a protected profile I think you can still see if you have any common friends.
I like how you ended your blog post, with a tip for the frustrated employee. If I am really frustrated with something my current boss is someone I know I talk to and help me get through something without it becoming a public issue. And what's great is she knows the difference between me being frustrated with a situation and any working relationship we may have.
Thanks, Jenn. Sounds like your sister dodged some bullets over the years! Fortunately, both of my brothers do not use social media. They would certainly get themselves in trouble on it if they did! Ha.
DeleteYes, finding friends that you have in common is a good tip, too. But, you have to be careful there. Scammers may have also reached your friends and, if your friends are like some of mine, they are not always careful and could have recently clicked "accept" to that person. I've seen it happen. Not so much today, but it definitely was more frequent in the early days of Facebook.
Thanks for your response. Off to go tighten my security settings on Instagram!
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that more clarity should to be provided to employers about what rights they should be providing to their employees about social media; and vice versa, what rights employees can expect to receive. As Collins (2012) points out, employees, in some instances, may not “reasonably be expected to understand which communications are protected and which communications are not.” It is crucial that employers outline their social media policies for this reason. You can also see some examples of confusion surrounding these rights as explained by the National Labor Relations Board's Report on Social Media Policy (2012). It details a number of cases which were investigated to determine whether or not disciplinary action stemming from employee behavior on social media violated federal law. It certainly is a complex topic and employers must do their best to protect themselves and their employees while following legal guidelines.
I believe I follow Microsoft’s tip of selectively accepting friends on social media well. I had someone recently ask me why I had less than 250 friends on Facebook, and my reply was that I don’t know that many people personally (nor do I wish to!) I have become even more selective over time – in high school and college, it was commonplace to accept a person even if you had never spoken but were in the same class together, for instance. But today, as a working professional, I am more focused on developing closer relationships and keeping in touch only with those who matter most to me.
Thank you also for sharing the video – it does a nice job to add commentary to this topic!
References:
Collins, J. (2012, February 1). NRLB report: Employers’ social media policies must be narrow, must not restrict right to engage in protected activities. Retrieved from http://www.natlawreview.com/article/nrlb-report-employers-social-media-policies-must-be-narrow-must-not-restrict-right-t.
National Labor Relations Board (2012). The NLRB and social media. Retrieved from https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/fact-sheets/nlrb-and-social-media.
Hi Nicole,
DeleteThank you for your thoughtful response. I've been meaning to talk with our college legal counsel about the NLRB ruling of social media rants. I agree. It's critical for businesses to establish clarity and outline their social media policies. Just as important, employers must be clear with which parts are guidelines and which parts are policy. I recommend two sections. That way there is little chance of confusion by the employee between what they can't do and what we advise they shouldn't do.
And, good for you to limit your friends on Facebook. Every now and then, I actually "clean up" my friends list, deleting those who haven't posted in a long time, or those whose political views I don't agree with! ha. Just kidding about that second part.
Steve,
ReplyDeleteGreat blog post! I appreciate your humor and the video and photos you chose to add to your blog.
You bring up a great point about not using social media when you are angry, frustrated or have just had a bad day at work. I think, millennials struggle with this the most. This generation grew up with social media at a very young age. From grade school, they were “connected”. I see this a lot with my college players. They are shocked when they google themselves and see their social media pages pop up instantly. They are eager to snap, share, tweet and post literally everything that happens to them! One of my players actually said after practice one day, “I can’t believe this photo only has 150 likes”. I was shocked, later to learn that a photo is not cool unless it get a 100 likes. They also told me they will wait to post something during “prime time” – usually before school (early in the am) or between 3-4 pm when everyone gets out of school or late at night!
Just last weekend, we had an issue with a player who posted a sarcastic remark on one of the colleges social media pages. Within an hour, a senior administrator contacted the coaching staff asking her to remove her post.
Hi Jannelle,
DeleteI, too, am amazed by students' reaction to social media reality. It's funny that you mention some of the athletes are amazed about the "public" availability of their information, yet they want high publicity of their photos. It is as if they believe their hundreds or sometimes thousands of friends are a secret society or something. It is hilarious and sad at the same time, but it sounds like you are at least trying to educate them. And that is a good thing.
I don't know anything more about the issue you mentioned except for what you wrote about it, but if a senior administrator actually asked your staff to remove the post, it's my opinion that the administrator crossed the line. Reviewing the NLRB's rulings, that administrator could be in big trouble and put Marist in trouble, too. Am I missing something with the NLRB’s interpretations?
My suggestion would be to reach out to the student publicly on that social media page and find out what the issue is and how the College can help. Taking a page out of Kerpen (2015), it is best to respond quickly to all comments on social media and take the conversation off line. It shows your audiences that you care and then you can handle the issue offline. What if the student said "no" to the request to remove the post and then went on a social media rant that the Marist tried to silence her free speech? What if the student went to the media?
Here's a good opportunity for you to reach out to the college's leadership to educate them. Perhaps Prof. Stevens would be willing to assist?
Kerpen, D. (2015). Likeable social media: How to delight your customers, create an irresistible brand, and be generally amazing on Facebook (& other social networks). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteI also read about the firing of the Yelp employee last week and wondered 1) how the social sphere would react and 2) if Yelp fired the employee with just cause. Since human resource information on employees is confidential in many respects, I suppose we will never know the true grounds for her termination.
I like the question you pose about when activity can be considered "protected concerted activity" and when the activity qualifies as an employee rant (Halpern, S. 2012). I am not sure I believe clicking the “like” button constitutes a conversation but would a comment such as “I agree with you” meet the criteria? This ambiguity is exactly why organizations have to set expectations for social media use by employees and take the time to update them regularly. Advances in technology and the emergence of new platforms, require policies that evolve with the social media environment.
I’m with you in that I do not add people I do not recognize to my social pages. I typically do a quick scan of the profile to understand how our networks intertwine and decide if I will accept. I have even been known to decline requests from people I do know if I do not want to worry about filtering what I post. In my mind, it is fine for some people to be on my Facebook but others are better left to LinkedIn.
Great title for your post, by the way!
References
Halpern, S. (3, December 2012). When is your company’s social media policy an unfair labor practice? Recent NLRB decisions offer long-awaited guidance for employers. Retrieved from http://www.natlawreview.com/article/when-your-company-s-social-media-policy-unfair-labor-practice-recent-nlrb-decisions-
Hi Jamie,
DeleteThe Yelp case continues to be an interesting one. It has been interesting to note that the employee’s generation (she’s a millennial) has been at the center of this debate. There have been hundreds of letters in response to the employee’s initial letter, some positive, many critical. And there have been hundreds of responses to THOSE responses. It seems to be a fairly common gripe these days to pick on millennials as not knowing the meaning of hard work or that they are too sensitive. It is too bad that “older” folks are assuming the worst out of a new generation of workers rather than focus on the real issue here – free speech.
Will public opinion of this case and others sway the courts and policy makers on future issues? Only time will tell.
You make a great point about how liking a post may not constitute protected concerted activity, but the comment “I agree with you” could. They both mean the exact same thing, but it is funny that there is a difference between clicking a thumbs up icon and actually saying what that means, but I guess that is the world we live in.