Facebook Comments Essay

The National Labor Relations Boards most recent ratiocination demonstrates that non all employee favorable media posts ar protected by the National Labor Relations make for. Questions remain, however, about the tip to which employees do- nonhing be disciplined over social media activity We can expect the NLRB to continue to address the topic of employee refines as they relate to social media. Employers should re flock their employee handbooks and employment policies to ensure compliance with the NLRA and the NLRBs jurisprudence. Employers should also contemplate training managers about permissible and prohibited conduct under the NLRA. Finally, employers should remember 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 view addressing employee terminations resulting from Facebook posts, the National Labor Rela tions Board (NLRB) determines that the comments were accommodative activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA or Act). This in style(p) 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 severalize none of the NLRBs continued focus on social media policies and its view of social media activity as akin to water cooler conversation. The decision should prompt all employers to evaluate their policies regarding employee social media usage and speech orthogonal the workplace. Employers should also train supervisory personnel on how to respond to the increase use of social media.2. would you willing to settle the charges voluntarily would you do so or insist on legal right to a perfunctory NLRB HEARING ON THE CHARGES? I would insist on my legal right to a formal hearing with the NLRB. The NLRBs main resuscitate is that whatever res trictions employers put on workers social media conduct do non botch up their rights under percentage 7 of the National Labor Relations Act to engage in protected concerted activity, such as discussing the damage and conditions of their employment with co-workers, even on Facebook. But that does non mean you gull to let your employees run amok online.Your policy is more in all probability to lead scrutiny if you have made an effort to provide specific examples of what is and is not acceptable conduct. Here are some examples from the recent guidance on social media policies that are employee-tested, NLRB-approved Prohibiting harassment, bullying, discrimination or retaliation, even at lieu or after business hours. Informing workers that they are more likely to resolve complaints by speaking with co-workers or going through the play along, or else than wit grievances online. Forbidding inappropriate postings, specifically threats of violence or anti-Semite(prenominal) rema rks. Instructing employees not to reveal trade secrets or confidential teaching, as unyielding as you detail the kind of information you mean, so on that points no chance of the policy being show to restrict Section 7 rights. 3. DID THE COMPANY COMMIT UNFAIR LABOR ACT?An employee was dismissed lawfully after posting negative comments on Facebook critical of patient care, because the employees postings were merely an expression of individual gripes, as opposed to protected concerted activity. In this case, at least several coworkers responded to the posting however, their messages reflected that the posting was individual 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 unconventional to di scharge any employee consistent to an overbroad social media policy prohibiting disclosure of private or confidential information of an new(prenominal) employee because the policy did not provide guidance on what the employer considered confidential. This is how I feel it was unfair labor actA policy prohibiting employees from reservation disparaging comments when discussing the employer or its supervisors was unlawful because the policy did not make solve that it did not prohibit protected concerted activity. The discharge of a paramedical i who posted demeaning comments concerning her employers clientele was lawful because there was no evidence of protected concerted activity the comments did not conjure 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 outgrowth of corporal concerns of the employee or her coworkers. The NLRBs recent report provides helpful guida nce to employers not wishing to become potential NLRB cases, including the followingCommunications that are not concerted are generally not protected.However, the cases highlight that a purpose of concerted activity might turn on evidence not readily 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 unshielded 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 objectionable language. An association policy that, reasonably interpreted, would tend to mantle employees in the exercise of their rights under the NLRA is likely to be found unlawful by the NLRB if i t is challenged. Given this new focus on social media, employers should1) refreshen their relevant employment policies to ensure that they are not overbroad and do not constitute potential unfair labor practices. 2) Proceed cautiously when find whether to discipline an employee because of his or her comments in postings on Facebook, Twitter or other social media.