Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Social Media Edition


It was a busy week for me so I did not have as much time as I would have liked to read through my normal amount of articles and cases.  With that being said, I did find a few articles dealing with social media in the workplace that I wanted to highlight.

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.



This is a rather well written piece by Michael Haberman that deals with who (and how) an employer can fire for social media activity.  The article breaks down who is covered by the protections of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") and what kind of discipline an employer can levy.  I would suggest employers give this one a read through...there are several important things to keep in mind when an employer wants to fire an employee for their social media activity and this article does a good job addressing that.



Hunter Johnson has a few thoughts on steps employers should take to avoid liability when they search an employee's device.  The best part of the article and one that I would steer readers towards is the section in which Johnson gives advice on what an employer can do to avoid being accused of illegally looking at employee's private information.


On the Job & Wanting to Post Something on Social Media? Think it Through First

The Huffington Post has a short article on a school bus driver in Ohio who took a selfie of what appeared to be her drinking a bottle of beer on the bus, posted it on Facebook, and subsequently got fired.  An investigation later revealed the driver was off duty, no children were on the bus, and the bottle of beer was not actually open.  It goes without saying that whatever an employee posts on social media (especially while on the job), should be done very carefully and with an eye towards what people may interpret the post as meaning.  Even though the driver in this case was not actually drinking and was not on duty, this was an avoidable situation that the employee should have thought twice about before posting a picture on social media. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more