"Facebook Firing" Leads to NLRB Filing

rated by 0 users
This post has 4 Replies | 0 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,356
Points 1,191,615
Joined: Sep 2007
News Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010 9:22 AM
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has accused a company of illegally firing an employee after she criticized her supervisor on Facebook. The  NLRB filed the complaint against American Medical Response of Connecticut, an ambulance service.  AMR fired Dawnmarie Souza, an EMT, after accusing her of violating a company policy barring employees from depicting the company “in any way” on any social networking site on which they post pictures of themselves.

The NLRB's complaint, filed on Oct. 27, was reported by the New York Times, which quoted Lafe Solomon, the board’s acting general counsel, as saying,
“This is a fairly straightforward case under the National Labor Relations Act — whether it takes place on Facebook or at the water cooler, it was employees talking jointly about working conditions, in this case about their supervisor, and they have a right to do that.”
Additionally, Solomon said, you can expect to see more such social networking type actions taken by the NLRB:
"This is the first complaint we've issued over comments on Facebook, but I have no doubt that we'll be seeing more. We have to develop policies as we go in this fast-changing environment."
Souza's post on Facebook drew responses from other co-workers. Jonathan Kreisberg, director of the board’s Hartford office, which filed the complaint, said,
“You’re allowed to talk about your supervisor with your co-workers. You’re allowed to communicate the concerns and criticisms you have. The only difference in this case is she did it on Facebook and did it on her own time and her own computer.”
From the NLRB's document summarizing the case:
When asked by her supervisor to prepare an investigative report concerning a customer complaint about her work, the employee requested and was denied representation from her union, Teamsters Local 443. Later that day from her home computer, the employee posted a negative remark about the supervisor on her personal Facebook page, which drew supportive responses from her co-workers, and led to further negative comments about the supervisor from the employee. The employee was suspended and later terminated for her Facebook postings and because such postings violated the company’s internet policies.

An NLRB investigation found that the employee’s Facebook postings constituted protected concerted activity, and that the company’s blogging and internet posting policy contained unlawful provisions, including one that prohibited employees from making disparaging remarks when discussing the company or supervisors and another that prohibited employees from depicting the company in any way over the internet without company permission. Such provisions constitute interference with employees in the exercise of their right to engage in protected concerted activity.
American Medical Response of Connecticut responded as follows, in a statement:
“The employee in question was discharged based on multiple, serious complaints about her behavior. 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.”
A hearing on the case is scheduled for January 25, 2011, before an Administrative Law Judge. A ruling there could be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals.

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 552
Points 5,045
Joined: Nov 2010
Location: Harker Heights

I hope they hammer the ever living out of American Medical Response until they almost go out of biz. An example has to be made that this type of action is wrong for companies to engage in and a little pittle pattle verdict against the company won't do that. If they get slammed badly though, other companies will take notice.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,686
Points 104,335
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
realneil replied on Thu, Nov 11 2010 7:06 AM

I hope that they follow the letter of the law. No more or less will do. Sounds as if she's out of there even if she wins this case considering the company's statement concerning her:

"The employee in question was discharged based on multiple, serious complaints about her behavior"

They'll show up with a shopping list of badness that will fire her anyway. At the most, this will change how they word it when they fire the next employee for the same reason.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 40
Points 350
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Akron, Ohio
Brian replied on Thu, Nov 11 2010 10:50 AM

I remember a case like this but the supervisor sued a woman and won for deformation of character just for talking about him on FB.

A lot of employers now want you to sign your life and rights away when it comes to the internet. I had heard once that the first amendment does not apply to the work place.

With the economy the way it is, this woman should have kept quiet on FB and went to the union right after she was denied representation. Maybe this case might give some power back to employees if she wins, and I hope it does.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 509
Points 3,965
Joined: Oct 2010
Location: HOLLAND!!!!
jonation replied on Thu, Nov 11 2010 7:58 PM

This is just gonna be one more piece of paper you have to sign when you get a job.

CPU: e6400 @ 3.2 (H-50'd)
MB: MSI p6n
RAM: 4G adata
GPU: GTS-450 and 8800GTS for Physx
HDD: WD 500G Black
PSU: 620W Corsair  Mod.
Case: 900-2 with 7 cathodes and AP-15s
OS: W7 and Ubuntu

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (5 items) | RSS