Wow! Week 6 already! This semester is flying by.
Our group leader, Shana, choose to discuss the topic of employee rights and guidelines when it comes to discussing the workplace on social media. I know for many companies, employees are prohibited from making statements about their company online, and sign social media policy agreements prior to being hired. However, as Shana pointed out in her blog post, employees may be legally protected more than they think when it comes to what they can and cannot say online. However, I personally do not think it smart to post anything negative about your employer online anyway - what are your thoughts on this? When is it appropriate to use social media to talk about your work, and when is it not?
Shana posed these questions for this week:
1. Discuss why (or why not) you believe it is important for employers to have social media policies.
To protect the company, and the employee, I do agree that it is important to have social media policies. Although I think it should be self explanatory, employees should have restrictions on what they can and can't post online. Especially with big corporations. For example, I work for a large pharmaceutical company. A lot of the information that employees are privy to is confidential, and should only be communicated to the public through the appropriate approved channels. If not, the reputation of the company could be jeopardized and wrong information could be distributed. This would put the company in jeopardy, but also the employee. Which is why to protect everyone, guidelines should be in place.
2. Out of the nine principles discussed by the NLRB, chose two that you either agree or disagree with implementing in the workplace, and provide specific examples on why.
#2. AGREE: Employers may restrict employees’ commercial use of company marks.
I agree with this statement because the use of a company logo on a personal account could confuse the public and to who has ownership and responsibility of what is being said. For example, if an angry McDonalds employee posts on their blog about about McDonalds employee are underpaid and over worked, and they attached the logo with the blog post, consumer may think that someone within McDonalds corporate is stating this, and the identity of the opinion could become confused. Logos for companies should only be used on approved materials put forth by the company as to know confused messages online.
7. DISAGREE: Opinions are largely protected.
I disagree with this policy because I think it is hypocritical to the rest of the NLRB policies. I also do not like it because I think the word "opinion" is too vague and leaves open too many opportunities for misuse. I do not think that the workplace should be discussed on public social media forums in any capacity, and I think any employee, or at least one who wants to keep their job, should refrain. For example, who is to say what is an opinion versus what is fact when discussing work place environments, etc. What may be acceptable to one employee, may not to another, and then this leaves for discrepancies. Also, depending on who the manager is, one employee could have a very different experience with the company than someone else. If an employee has an issue with their work place, they should address it appropriately with Human Resources.
Erica,
ReplyDeleteExcellent post!
First I want to respond to the questions you posed : what are your thoughts on this? When is it appropriate to use social media to talk about your work, and when is it not?
I agree with you, that it's not smart to post anything negative about your employer. It's far too difficult to erase anything you say on the internet (even when you think you do), and a negative post can hover you like a black cloud throughout your career. Future potential employers may not consider you if they know you've publicly aired personal work problems. It's not only a bad look for a company, but it's a bad look for you, too. Posting on social media is obviously much more appropriate when there are positive things to say. It can help garner positive vibes and feelings in the professional setting. All in all- negative postings should be forbidden, for the reasons mentioned about.
Great example on the restriction of employee's commercial logo uses...but if an employee were to comment on being underpaid and over worked, it could be regarded as a work-related discussion. "An employer’s policy should clearly explain that restrictions on the use of company marks do not prohibit employees from making non-commercial use of the marks, such as in workplace or work-related discussions or in labor related activities (for example in connection with a legal protest about workplace conditions)" (Halpern, 2012). I totally agree that there should be restrictions on the commercial use of the logo by employees-but according to NLRB, they are not prohibited in work discussions. Interesting, isn't it?
-SB
Reference:
Halpern, S. (2012, Dec 3). 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,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with what you said overall, but where you disagree about Opinions Are Largely Protected, I am conflicted. I agree that discussing the workplace on social media is risky for the company. But, as I discussed in my blog post, I think that employees should have the right to speak out if working conditions are unfair. It is such a slippery slope, because mouthing off about a company when it is not true can hurt the company's reputation or image. But, there are some situations that need to be aired on a public forum, if there are a lot of different infractions that occur and if higher-ups are not taking action. I believe in freedom of speech strongly, so this is why some of these principles were tricky for me.
But, where do we draw the line? Social media policies need to be in place for many reasons. But should they be so stringent, that if an employee says something that is going on that they could face termination? Perhaps there should be a policy in place where the employee has to go through proper channels to voice a grievance. If the grievance is not addressed then they could speak publicly about it. It is a lot to consider.
Hi Erica. I thought that was a great post. I of course agree that a social media policy should be put in place in order to protect both employers and employees. One of the things I found interesting while working for a major corporation was that they outlined a long list of don'ts regarding social media policy, yet in meetings they were always telling us to get on social media and promote the company. It didn't sit well with me because they were basically telling employees not to say anything bad about the company and then pressuring us to promote the company. The social media policy was too rigidly structured. In regards to your question, I think it is only appropriate to post negatively about your company if it is in the form of constructive dialogue. Otherwise, I agree that it would not be wise to speak negatively about one's company on a public forum.
ReplyDeleteI agree that only official company messages should be allowed to use a company marks because it will get confusing. I agree with you in that the use of the word opinion is rather vague and it probably needs a more clear definition. However, I do think it is permissible for individuals to share some information about their company over social media as long as it is in accordance with the other guidelines decreed by the NLRB. The whole point of social media is to share information freely. I think if someone has something to say they can pose it in a polite and meaningful way. If one employee experience is different than another's than I think that social media is a good way to bring the issue to the company's attention. Once it becomes a very personal or legal issue then I believe the conversation should be removed from the public eye and dealt with by the proper authorities. I liked that you chose to disagree Erica. It is easier to agree and I think this direction spurred more conversation. Good post.
Everett
Hi Erica,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post! What I found a bit unclear about the NRLA was its distinction between “rants” made by an individual employee, and online discussion between co-workers about the workplace. I’m not sure that there is always a clear difference. On social media, could a negative opinion about an employer be considered a rant until another employee responds to the post? Do public vs. private forums make a difference? I’m not entirely sure how this is determined, and I hope I’m not alone in this regard.