links for 2008-11-01
-
After recently arguing that bosses shouldn't ban Facebook – THIS is one major why they do, and you can understand why. You always represent the company you work for (and the friends you have and the family you hail from). Calling your customers 'chavs' and bitching about them is going to get you fired.
My reviews- Doctor Who 2024 – a Whovian conversation
- Father Brown S11 (BBC One) [2024]
- Doctor Who – “The Star Beast”, “Wild Blue Yonder” and more
- Father Brown S10 (BBC One) [2023]
- Tag! You have The Power of the Doctor
- Father Brown S9 (BBC One) [2022]
- No Time To Die (2021)
- Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase 2
- An epistle about Father Brown
- Star Trek: Picard S1 (2020) [DVD]
- My Google Shared Items
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- My motorsport blog posts
- Will the 2012 Bahrain GP take place?
- A first look at the 2012 season form book
- Sutil convicted over nightclub fracas
- A slumbering blog
- Future/Present: who will be the faces of tomorrow’s F1?
- F1: Sky finally claim the Grand Prix
- NASCAR: Loudon success rejuvenates Stewart-Haas
- INDYCAR: Recriminations rage on after Toronto
- INDYCAR: Toronto action proves popular with viewers
- INDYCAR: Dario wins stormy Toronto crashfest
- Comments on my motorsport blog
- Comment on Will the 2012 Bahrain GP take place? by Bahraini youth vow ‘three days of rage’ during Formula 1 « This Day – One Day
- Comment on F1: Sky finally claim the Grand Prix by andrewlewin
- Comment on F1: Sky finally claim the Grand Prix by Chris Williams
- Comment on IRL: Round 11 – Edmonton Airport, Canada – July 25 by NASCAR: Round 20 – Brickyard 400, Indianapolis – July 25 «
- Comment on NASCAR: Round 12 – Autism Speaks 400, Dover International – May 16 by chuckraw
- Comment on F1: Round 4 – Shanghai, China – April 18 by andrewlewin
- Comment on IRL: Round 4 – Long Beach – April 18 by andrewlewin
- Comment on F1: Round 4 – Shanghai, China – April 18 by Seb Crump
- Comment on IRL: Round 4 – Long Beach – April 18 by spreadoption
- Comment on NASCAR: Round 2 – Auto Club 500, Fontana – 21 February by Bob
My Flickr Photos
Recent Comments
-
andrewlewin: let me think about that ... 
November 2, 2008 at 12:31 am
Yes, that was an interesting case. I think the response from Virgin was pretty much spot on: Facebook’s fine, but don’t sound off about work or be rude to customers. If there’s a problem, raise it through internal channels.
November 2, 2008 at 12:45 am
It does raise some interesting questions though, such as: are staff accountable to their employer 24/7? Is there no such thing any more as ‘personal time’ when you’re not representing your employer?
More specifically with the general issue of expressing a view, what does it mean for public sector workers? If we, as civil servants, have a different view on a government policy, would expressing it anywhere and any time be a sackable offence? And how would this square with human rights/freedom of speech legislation?
Interesting issues, as ever with this sort of new emerging technology.
November 2, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I don’t think it has anything to do with Facebook, social networks generally or even the web though, does it? It doesn’t matter what medium someone uses, if they slag off customers or their bosses then they get disciplined. In fact, using the web makes it easier to catch people at it, so if anything employers should be encouraging it!
November 2, 2008 at 1:40 pm
I think you manage to change your argument midway through! It DOES have something to do with Facebook/SNS purely because these things are far more networked, they’re ‘permanent’ in a way that water cooler gossip isn’t, and people aren’t used to them – so they get caught out by employers finding them and taking action. Would a company have acted against staff for talking like this on a cigarette break? No. They wouldn’t have known about it and, if they had, there would have been nothing material to prove it. So Web 2,0 is the difference here.
November 5, 2008 at 8:07 am
This is such an important question, and I wish it wasn’t just being debated in comments on blogs here and there. It seems like the only way we’ll find the answers to them is through precedent – which could be at the cost of people’s jobs. For now, perhaps it’s safer to assume that the answer to Andrew’s Q: “If we, as civil servants, have a different view on a government policy, would expressing it anywhere and any time be a sackable offence?” is probably YES. The transgression of civil service code would possibly trump the human rights/freedom of speech angle: in that we, as *identifiable* civil servants, can’t go public with our political views. (Luckily for me, I’m pretty agnostic).