National Labor Board Supports Employee Fired Over Facebook Post

by Amar Toor on November 9, 2010 at 10:28 AM

We've seen plenty of people lose their jobs over things they post on Facebook. Now, the National Labor Relations Board has stepped to their defense.

As the New York Times reports, the NLRB filed a complaint last week against American Medical Response of Connecticut, an ambulance service that fired an employee for posting comments about her boss. The employee, Dawnmarie Souza, allegedly posted a critical comment about her supervisor, who had reprimanded her for attempting to join a union. The post, according to the NLRB, "drew supportive responses from her co-workers, and led to further negative comments about the supervisor from the employee." American Medical Response's policy reportedly forbids employees from discussing the company on social networking sites.

According to the NLRB, however, the company's decision violated Souza's federally protected workplace rights. The National Labor Relations Act gives workers the right to form unions, and bars employers from punishing employees for discussing unionization -- which, the NLRB argues, is exactly what American Medical Response did to Souza. The board also criticized another company policy, which prohibits workers from posting "disparaging" or "discriminatory" online remarks when discussing their bosses or colleagues.

American Medical Response of Connecticut, meanwhile, insists that the NLRB's allegations are completely unfounded. "The employee in question was discharged based on multiple, serious complaints about her behavior," the company said in a statement. "The employee was also held accountable for negative personal attacks against a co-worker posted publicly on Facebook. The company believes that the offensive statements made against the co-workers were not concerted activity protected under federal law."

An administrative law judge will hear the case on January 25th, but former NLRB member Marshall B. Babson doesn't think the case is as clear-cut as the board seems to see it. A company rule that expressly forbids workers from badmouthing supervisors is one thing. A Facebook policy, he says, is quite another. If a user complained about his boss without engaging his co-workers, for example, that may not constitute the kind of "concerted protected activity" that federal law defends. If an online dialogue involves several employees, on the other hand, the judge may rule otherwise. Regardless of which way the judge swings, though, this is the first time that the NLRB has publicly defended an employee involved in a workplace Facebook snafu -- and that alone is pretty significant.

http://xml.channel.aol.com/xmlpublisher/fetch.v2.xml?option=expand_relative_urls&dataUrlNodes=uiConfig,feedConfig,entry&id=786664&pid=786663&uts=1289419140

http://cdn.channel.aol.com/cs_feed_v1_6/csfeedwrapper.swf

Facebook's Most Annoying Things

Problem: Cryptic status updates
Why it's annoying: The status update reads: "John wonders why people act that way" -- and nothing more. What happened to John? Is he confused? Have his feelings been hurt? What on earth could lead to such a mysterious comment? Give context or shut up, John. With updates like this, you're only fishing for responses. Facebook is not your personal diary.
Possible solution: If John's an especially close friend, call him. If not, just ignore the vague thoughts. If he wants to discuss specifics, that's the time to talk.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Sure, Facebook can be a lot of fun. It's a great way to reconnect with lost friends and to keep up with people on the fringes of your social circle. And as far as workday distractions go, there's nothing better.

It's hardly a perfect service, though. Minor aggravations add up fast and can drive you nuts. We've combed through the annoyances to find the ten annoyances that bug people the most.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Constant interface changes
Why it's annoying: Granted, innovation is necessary to avoid becoming stale, but sometimes you're better off leaving well enough alone. Facebook has radically overhauled its front page so many times that it's hard to keep count. Just as the anger dies down over one design, the site changes things again -- and confusion sets in. What's the difference between "News feed" and "Live feed"? And why can't Facebook remember which I prefer?
Possible solution: Sadly, there's not much you can do about this -- except wait for the next face-lift.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Inappropriate automated friend suggestions
Why it's annoying: Friend suggestions can be handy, but when Facebook tries to push an ex-girlfriend or boyfriend on you, it's kind of awkward. Similarly, if you've had a major falling-out with someone who has mutual friends, you're bound to see their face pop up in the 'suggestion' field at some point. It makes a clean break that much harder to get.

Possible solution: The little "x" to the right will make the suggestion go away forever. To prevent further frustration, you might want to also click "see all" and weed out any other offending names.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Never-ending game invitations
Why it's annoying: 'Farmville' and 'Mafia Wars' might be fun, but if you don't want to play them, the constant invites are infuriating. Many Facebook games are like Ponzi schemes; the way to succeed is to get more people playing. And once you've managed to filter out one game, another pops up.
Possible solution: It's not too hard to hide the requests and invitations for these games. Just click "Block this application" when you get the first invite. Then, hover over the updates that are clogging your news feed, and click "Hide" when the word appears.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Political fights
Why it's annoying: Between cable news and talk radio, it's hard enough to hide the squabbling between the left and the right. So when political debates fire up on Facebook, it's particularly annoying. All you want to do is see friends' pictures and learn what they're up to -- not eavesdrop on a debate over healthcare reform.
Possible solution: If you've got a friend who picks such fights in their status updates, you might be best off hiding them. You can still check in on them whenever you'd like, but you won't have opinions shoved down your throat.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Imported updates from Twitter
Why it's annoying: Tweets have their own language and shorthand, and if you're not familiar with the 140-character-or-less updates, it might look like someone had a hand spasm while typing. Facebook and Twitter are two entirely different services -- and forcing the two together feels like a poorly arranged marriage.
Possible solution: Once again, you're kind of stuck. Your best bet is to either embrace the language of the tweet -- or learn to selectively ignore posts.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: No 'Dislike' button
Why it's annoying: A friend proudly mentions in a status update that she got a promotion. That's an easy thing to like. But what about when they announce they've been laid off? In its relentless drive to be cheery, Facebook hasn't given us the choice to quickly commiserate or disagree with someone.
Possible solution: There's an active lobbying effort to get Facebook to add a 'Dislike' button, with over 553,000 people members of a group specifically asking for one. Hopefully, the powers that be will listen to the protests.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: People who 'friend' you too fast
Why it's annoying: Sometimes it's a person you've gone out with one time. Sometimes it's a coworker you only speak with occasionally. But odds are you've been 'friended' by someone you'd rather not have on your list. Technically, ignoring the request is an option, but that can create some real world tensions.
Possible solution: Your privacy settings can make this problem an easy one to conquer. You can block specific people from seeing status updates, photos and more by choosing 'custom' and black-listing them. Then, hide their updates from your news feed.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Stealth tagging
Why it's annoying: We all have horrifying childhood pictures or shots we wouldn't want to share with the world. Invariably, though, friends will post them as a joke of sorts and tag you. All of a sudden, that prom picture of you with acne, coke-bottle glasses, and a really bad perm is out there for everyone to see.
Possible solution: You can untag yourself, which prevents others from putting your name to the picture -- but in some cases, that's closing the barn door after the horse has run away.

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Problem: Obvious celebrity marketing ploys
Why it's annoying: Celebrities love Facebook -- or so it would seem. But all too often, it's someone writing on their behalf (and often poorly). That doesn't stop avid fans from falling over themselves to 'like' every comment and chime in as part of the 'amen' chorus.
Possible solution: Unless you're sure it's actually the celebrity doing the updates, you'd often do better to just avoid the pages. After all, is it really that critical that you declare yourself as a fan?

Most Annoying Things About Facebook

Tags: AmericanMedicalResponseOfConnecticut, DawnmarieSouza, employment, facebook, fired, labor, lawsuit, NationalLaborRelationsBoard, nlrb, SocialNetworking, top, union, web, workplace

source: NYT, National Law Journal

Comments

UberSilNov 10th 2010 2:51PM

Neutral

I'm pretty sure that the board will say that Souza's rights were violated in regards to unionizing and everything that occurred after is a result of that action. Which would put the board on the winning side, what's strange is that the author of the blog post generally ignores this aspect.

Dislike

Report

jeffNov 10th 2010 6:36PM

Neutral

@Silenus no this gal is gonna lose big time. if there's a rule at work that u don't post things about superiors on facebook, then ya don't post them on facebook....period.

Dislike

Report

WandaNov 10th 2010 8:57AM

Low Ranked

It's about time that the NLRB stepped in to protect and defend employees rights to the Freedom of Speach. Seems like companies are just looking for ways to lay more people off and send them to the wolves and the unemployment lines. Thank you NLRB, there are many more out there that this has happened to and these companies need to pay up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dislike

Report

mrsvoniiNov 10th 2010 2:57PM

Highest Ranked

Work belongs at work and friends belong at home and posting anything on any social networking site blurs those lines and should be avoided by wise people without regard to any court decision. Whether your Mom's church friends find out you like to drink till you pass out or your employer discovers you hate her guts or your school learns that you cheat on tests the way to prevent it is Dont Post It.

Dislike

Report

M. SamuelsNov 10th 2010 3:41PM

Highest Ranked

If you are foolish enough to ran,t and possibly slander a co-worker, boss, etc., they usually find a way to hold you accountable. If you cannot say it to their face, keep it to youself, and start prospecting for a new job, because your negative attitude is most likely know around the office

Dislike

Report

AnitaNov 10th 2010 5:18PM

Highest Ranked

I wouldn't post anything online that I wouldn't want the whole world to know. My son was fired for posting a neg about his boss. That's the other thing, it doesn't pay to get too chummy at work. I wouldn't friend my boss if there were any chance I'd say something stupid.

Dislike

Report

oldmevNov 10th 2010 5:03PM

Highly Ranked

Employers have become way too intrusive in employees lives IMO.
If an employee's comments were said or written in a company forum
or at work that is one thing, they are being paid to represent the company.
But if they are said in a public forum off duty pay and are not slanderous or threatening by definition of law, then why should an employer have any recourse or say. If one steps over those boundaries they must be willing to accept any of the consequences.
It has become more about ownership of employees for large companies and corporations and they feel they have a right to direct an employees moral, social and private behaviors and unfortunately in many instances the courts have backed them.
But many employers lose cases after firing an employee because they
do not even follow their own SOP's or they apply them disparagingly.
It is usually very easy to review past records of employers and prove disparaged treatment or lack of applying rules evenly.

Dislike

Report

SammeeNov 10th 2010 5:32PM

Neutral

As the owner of a new start-up business, I can definitely sympathize with companies who fire employees due to negative postings on a social site. It's no secret that customer feedback plays a huge role regarding who people choose to do business with. So the last thing any company needs is an actual employee publicly spreading negative feedback about the business. Employees who speak negatively about their employer are actually hurting everyone - including themselves. Who would want to do business with a company that the employees trash? No business = fewer (or worst case scenario no) jobs. Everyone has gripes about their employers, which is one of the reasons I struck out on my own. I'll try my best to be a good manager, but for the inevitable times I fail to do this, the bottom line for my employees will be to save their gripes for friends and family behind private closed doors, or face the consequences. I'm trying to build and maintain a business and their jobs. I don't need their help hammering it to the ground.

Dislike

Report

SteveNov 11th 2010 8:47AM

Neutral

FYI, I work with this person, SHE WAS ALREADY PART OF THE UNION! This story is partially false. She was already a member of Teamsters Local 443...paying her dues. As article states, she has had many disciplinary actions against her during her tenure at the company.

Dislike

Report

rann948Nov 10th 2010 6:29PM

Neutral

Look at London burning. That is what unions are going to bring to this country. Whining, snotty employees who think they deserve everything for the least amount of effort. Anyone stupid enough to dis her boss on a networking site should be unemployed.

Dislike

Report

chckpopeNov 10th 2010 7:21PM

Neutral

If for no other reason than she's stupid. In this day and age to expect your employer isn't going to read your facebook, blog or any other media you access is totally naive. Good luck looking for another job.

Dislike

Report

MartenNov 10th 2010 8:24PM

Neutral

Sadly, this oh so perfect, awesome person, will get her job back. Pathetic.

Dislike

Report

kathieNov 10th 2010 9:57PM

Neutral

Both sides are making great arguments for both sides of the article. What I find interesting is that the author, as so many people do, thinks that "snafu" is a word. It actually stands for "Situation Normal, All (Fouled) Up."

Dislike