Facebook Comments Essay

The topic project Relations Boards most recent decision demonstrates that not all employee complaisant media posts are protected by the National Labor Relations Act. Questions remain, however, about the extent to which employees can be disciplined over social media activity We can expect the NLRB to continue to address the topic of employee rights as they relate to social media. Employers should review their employee handbooks and employment policies to ensure compliance with the NLRA and the NLRBs jurisprudence. Employers should similarly consider didactics managers about permissible and prohibited conduct under the NLRA. Finally, employers should consider conducting their own education programs, including reminding employees of social media policies.1. DOES AN EMPLOYEEE HAS any LEGAL RIGHT TO DESCIPLINE OR DISCHARGE AN EMPLOYEE OVER COMMENT ABOUT THE COMPANY? In my discernment addressing employee terminations resulting from Facebook posts, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) determines that the comments were plan activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA or Act). This latest decision reinforces that employers must exercise caution before terminating or disciplining employees as a result of their comments on social media. The answer is no. Employers should take note of the NLRBs continued focus on social media policies and its view of social media activity as akin to wet cooler conversation. The decision should prompt all employers to evaluate their policies regarding employee social media usage and speech outside the workplace. Employers should also train supervisory personnel on how to respond to the increased use of social media.2. would you willing to descend the charges voluntarily would you do so or insist on legal right to a schematic NLRB HEARING ON THE CHARGES? I would insist on my legal right to a formal hear with the NLRB. The NLRBs main concern is that any restrictions employers put on workers social media condu ct do not violate their rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act to engage in protected concerted activity, such as discussing the terms and conditions of their employment with co-workers, even on Facebook. But that does not mean you have to let your employees run amok online.Your constitution is more likely to survive examen if you have made an effort to provide specific examples of what is and is not acceptable conduct. Here are somewhat examples from the recent steerage on social media policies that are employee-tested, NLRB-approved Prohibiting harassment, bullying, discrimination or retaliation, even at kinsfolk or after business hours. Informing workers that they are more likely to resolve complaints by utterance with co-workers or going through the company, rather than bill sticker grievances online. Forbidding inappropriate postings, specifically threats of violence or discriminatory remarks. Instructing employees not to reveal trade secrets or confi dential information, as long as you decimal point the kind of information you mean, so theres no chance of the policy being select to restrict Section 7 rights. 3. DID THE COMPANY COMMIT UNFAIR LABOR ACT?An employee was discharged lawfully after posting negative comments on Facebook critical of patient care, because the employees postings were merely an expression of singular gripes, as opposed to protected concerted activity. In this case, at least several coworkers responded to the posting however, their messages forgeed that the posting was undivided and not group activity. The NLRB also rejects a policy requiring company approval for employees to identify themselves as employees on social networking sites or requiring the employees to state that their comments are their personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the employers opinions. Not surprisingly, the NLRB also found it is unlawful to discharge any employee pursuant to an overbroad social media policy prohibit ing disclosure of private or confidential information of an early(a) employee because the policy did not provide guidance on what the employer considered confidential. This is how I feel it was unfair poke actA policy prohibiting employees from making pick apart comments when discussing the employer or its supervisors was unlawful because the policy did not make clear that it did not prohibit protected concerted activity. The discharge of a paramedic i who posted demeaning comments concerning her employers clientele was lawful because there was no evidence of protected concerted activity the comments did not mention any terms or conditions of employment, the posting was not discussed with any coworkers, and the comments were not for the purpose of inducing group activity or an effect of collective concerns of the employee or her coworkers. The NLRBs recent report provides helpful guidance to employers not wishing to bring potential NLRB cases, including the followingCommunicatio ns that are not concerted are generally not protected.However, the cases spotlight that a finding of concerted activity might turn on evidence not quickly available to the employer, so caution is warranted. Communications that are concerted (i.e., that are not merely an individual gripe) on matters of mutual concern to employees are likely to be found to be protected by the NLRA. Communications that are protected do not become unprotected simply because the comments are communicated via the internet and/or because they might be read by nonemployees as well. Communications that are protected do not become unprotected just because they contain some critical (about the employer) or otherwise obnoxious language. An association policy that, reasonably interpreted, would tend to chill employees in the exercise of their rights under the NLRA is likely to be found unlawful by the NLRB if it is challenged. Given this new focus on social media, employers should1) Review their applicable e mployment policies to ensure that they are not overbroad and do not constitute potential unfair labor practices. 2) Proceed cautiously when determining whether to discipline an employee because of his or her comments in postings on Facebook, Twitter or other social media.