Skip to main content

Beware What You Post on Facebook - Even Just "Venting" Can Be Grounds for Termination & Denial of Unemployment Benefits


Talbot v. Desert View Care Center - Supreme Court of Idaho


Facts:  Talbot worked as a nurse at Desert View Care Center.  However, a Facebook post triggered his termination for violating the employer's social media policy.  In the post, Talbot stated that he didn't like some patients who made his work difficult and stated that these patients made him less motivated to answer their call light whenever they needed something.  After one of Talbot's Facebook friends, a nursing professor, reported the post to the employer and expressed concerns about resident safety, the employer fired Talbot and cited its social media policy. 

Talbot sought unemployment benefits but his claim was denied because he was discharged for violating the company's policy.  Talbot appealed and the Appeals Examiner reversed the initial denial and found that Talbot had not been terminated for employment related misconduct.  The employer appealed and the decision was reversed and Talbot was denied unemployment benefits.  Talbot subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court of Idaho.

Holding:  The Supreme Court of Idaho upheld the denial of Talbot's unemployment benefits.  When the Court examined the facts of the case, it honed in on the fact that the employer had an expectation that its nurses would not make threatening statements about a patient on Facebook and that Talbot failed to meet the employer's expectations.  Talbot's argument that his post was not a threat and only his way of "venting steam" did not fly with the Court.

Judgment:  The Supreme Court of Idaho upheld the decision to deny Talbot unemployment benefits as a result of threatening post on Facebook in violation of the employer's social media policy.

The Takeaway:  This decision makes sense, given the liability the employer could have faced if a patient had suffered harm as a result of Talbot's admitted unwilling desire to offer the best care to all patients.  In a case like this, especially with an employer in the health care industry, it is important to remain vigilant and insure that when a social media policy is in place, that employees respect it and not post comments that are deemed threatening.

Majority Opinion Judge:  Chief Judge Burdick

Date:  June 20, 2014

Opinion:  http://www.isc.idaho.gov/opinions/41208.pdf


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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more