2 workers fired after controversy over disrespectful Arlington Cemetery photo

[nucklehead]

TLDR: If you're in the private sector, you're not protected by the 1st Amendment. Companies need the best people working for them, and if you demonstrate through Facebook you're not, then to the unemployment line for you.

http://www.theglobea...article4346982/

Can an employer fire employees for what they do outside office hours?

With very few exceptions, an employer can fire an employee for just about anything. It just comes down to whether the employer owes the employee severance or if the employee’s conduct is so egregious, the employer can dismiss the employee for “cause” with no severance at all.

After the riot, I’m aware of at least one business that fired a well-liked and long-standing employee because she was photographed looting Sears. Her picture was one of scores uploaded to websites dedicated to catching the rioters and it found its way to the pages of the Vancouver Province and Vancouver Sun.

Whether the business she worked for had to pay four weeks severance or no severance was not as important as firing her. The business just wanted that person gone because of the damage her continued employment was having on the company’s reputation. The clients of the business read the papers too.

So one lesson all employees should learn is that whether they are receptionists, servers, salespersons or any other employee who directly engages with the public, they are the face of the company and an ambassador for its brand and image. If their photographs are all over the newspapers looting a department store during a riot, customers could well associate an employee’s “after-hours activity” with the employer.

http://www.forbes.co...ia-misbehavior/

the Constitution doesn’t apply to private employers, so employees can’t claim the right to freedom of speech.

But all private employers must respect their workers’ right to “protected concerted activity” — in other words, the right to talk among themselves about their

horrible

working conditions.

http://mashable.com/...al-media-fired/ (#11 comes to mind in this case)

http://business.fina...-get-you-fired/

Even before social media, when a university lecturer was convicted of fraud in the early 1980s in an insurance claim unrelated to his employment, a court concluded that it was cause for dismissal. The reason?

It could undermine confidence in the school and deleteriously impact both upon its enrolment and funding.

[...]

In all of the cases cited above, the conduct related to the nature of the employees’ roles. However, even when the misconduct bears no relation to a person’s job functions, it can still be cause for discharge if the employer’s interests, such as its reputation, are affected.

The broad panoply of offsite misconduct that could be cause for discharge is too broad to be catalogued and is limited only by workplace norms and employees’ imaginations. But whether at work or outside, the test is the same:

If misconduct is sufficiently serious to threaten an employer’s reputation or wellbeing, it can be cause for dismissal without severance.

http://www.slate.com...n_facebook.html

You might think the First Amendment decides the legal issue here, but it doesn’t. The Constitution protects free speech from government interference. In the private sector, however, courts have made management discretion the rule.

Employees who don’t work for the government and aren’t in a union can be fired or punished for almost anything they say, wherever they say it.

Business groups say

companies need the authority to put the best person in the job and to shuffle as they deem necessary.

[RUPERTKBD]

I consider myself very lucky to have grown up in an age where instant photo's, even like "Polaroids", were rare .. we all get these impulses when we are young .. trying to find the child still inside? .. raging against the very air?

[MoneypuckOverlord]

Good point. Hiring a woman can easily tarnish our reputation as a business, especially if she were seen at an abortion clinic. Oh, and a gay man being seen at a gay pride parade.. better distance myself from anyone who goes to those things.

[Riviera82]

You argue like an android lover / apple hater.

Unreasonable.

That girl volunteered to have her photo taken, and she posed for it.

A girl cannot be fired if she was at an abortion Clinic.

Gay Pride Parade is actually a freedom of speech.

You fail.

btw, the Fan who flashed Ben Eager at game 5 in 2011 against SAn Jose was also fired.

Just saying. If what your doing is totally unprofessional, and "immature" yes... you can get fired.

As I said in my previous post, try to think of it, in the employers point of view.

[لني]

Overreact much? I didn't know the deceased had such sensitive ears.

[Mr. Ambien]

You argue like an android lover / apple hater.

Unreasonable.

That girl volunteered to have her photo taken, and she posed for it.

A girl cannot be fired if she was at an abortion Clinic.

Gay Pride Parade is actually a freedom of speech.

You fail.

btw, the Fan who flashed Ben Eager at game 5 in 2011 against SAn Jose was also fired.

Just saying. If what your doing is totally unprofessional, and "immature" yes... you can get fired.

As I said in my previous post, try to think of it, in the employers point of view.

[Common sense]

1. This is from a U.S. source.2. What she did is not that egregious, IMHO.What she did might merit a warning or word of advice and in all likelyhood she would have seen the error of her ways. If she was not a great employee maybe this is the break the employer was looking for.In light of this article however, I pause for reflection. I'm just a little sensitive to this kind of thing at the moment because very recently I discovered an old email that I didn't get from last April. Apparently I made a comment on GlobalTVs facebook page that someone took issue with.[i do not recall what it was in relation to and was unable to contact the person about it]. They proceeded to send an email to my business website informing me of the comments of my employee[me]and that I should very ashamed of said employee[me]. I wish I knew what it was in reference to but if anyone knows me they know my sarcastic wit, something that gets lost in translation online at times. The incident just pissed me off about people who take it upon themselves to police the world and try to make trouble for people they don't even know. Sadly something like this could cause trouble for other people that are just having a little fun. What I learned was to delete my "works at" tag of FB.

[sakage.shinga]

Dumb and immature, especially considering that what they did really has less to do with "challenging authority" but more to do with disrespecting the dead. Smoking next to to no-smoking sign was more suitable for what she claimed she was doing.

Having said that, firing her was a bit much. I'd say make her pay for the trip out of her own pocket and also issue a written apology on her facebook page.

[Mr. Ambien]

While I made reference to to TGAM and the Financial Post, I also included Forbes and Slate in my citations - two reputable US companies that cited US law (and in particular, how the 1st Amendment didn't come into play)

I don't know if deleting the "works at" tag does any good - in some cases, it might be people on your friends list who rat you out. What I learned is when posting on a public forum (ie. using Disqus), do so using an alternate account, one that can't be traced back to you or your workplace.

[Electro Rock]

You just don't do that kind of thing in the U.S., you just don't.

[Mastaj]

There are two issues here:

1. Was it legal to fire these two employees?

2. Was it morally justified by their employer to do so?

In the first case, yes it was legal to fire them. In the US and in Canada, unless governed by a specific contract, you can get fired at anytime, for any reason. The only consideration is whether you are owed severance pay or not. If you are are fired for a justifiable reason (i.e., stealing from your employer), then you are not owed anything. Otherwise, you can get fired at anytime, with appropriate severance, which is based on a number of factors including years of service and how likely it is you can find a new job.

So, understanding the legality of the firing, was it morally right to do so? Should they have been given a stern warning and a second chance? Well, this is going to depend completely on the culture of the employer, and while we may have our own opinions, it is up to the organization. In this case, due to the high exposure of the photo and the availability of social media, the company felt it was in its best interest to let them go. Not all companies would have decided this, but they clearly did. And while I think it is a tad harsh, we also do not know what the past history with these women are, or how much bad PR they have generated, or how important public image is to this particular business.

Bottom line - you can get fired for anything, so make sure your online presence is clean, even if you are a douchebag in real life (and even that might not save you....).

[Wetcoaster]

Very stupid. But a firable offence? Not IMO

[Wetcoaster]

There are two issues here:

1. Was it legal to fire these two employees?

2. Was it morally justified by their employer to do so?

In the first case, yes it was legal to fire them. In the US and in Canada, unless governed by a specific contract, you can get fired at anytime, for any reason. The only consideration is whether you are owed severance pay or not. If you are are fired for a justifiable reason (i.e., stealing from your employer), then you are not owed anything. Otherwise, you can get fired at anytime, with appropriate severance, which is based on a number of factors including years of service and how likely it is you can find a new job.

So, understanding the legality of the firing, was it morally right to do so? Should they have been given a stern warning and a second chance? Well, this is going to depend completely on the culture of the employer, and while we may have our own opinions, it is up to the organization. In this case, due to the high exposure of the photo and the availability of social media, the company felt it was in its best interest to let them go. Not all companies would have decided this, but they clearly did. And while I think it is a tad harsh, we also do not know what the past history with these women are, or how much bad PR they have generated, or how important public image is to this particular business.

Bottom line - you can get fired for anything, so make sure your online presence is clean, even if you are a douchebag in real life (and even that might not save you....).

[Mastaj]

" in Canada, unless governed by a specific contract, you can get fired at anytime, for any reason." That is untrue - at least in BC and the employer would have the burden of proving "just cause". See my post above.

[Mikey2Dope]

This was done on company time on a "work paid trip". So yes it would be of concern to her employer.

[Niloc009]

If the context of my previous posts weren't an indicator (yes, I know, some people need to have their hand held). I am an employer.

Some of us don't take an interpretation of company reputation and apply it to the personal lives of others unless their job description meets the criteria of that comparatively to Kobe Bryant's endorsement with Nike. Extending the belief of reputation to cover the private lives of citizens especially when it doesn't come in direct conflict with their job gives most businesses that aren't large corporations an added liability that isn't worth the time or cost, and as someone who has a personal life of their own, it's downright creepy.

Please try and follow along.

[Wetcoaster]

The second part of my sentence clarifies what I meant. You can get fired for any reason, but if it was not for cause, you are owed severance. I agree with your post, I just didn't explain as eloquently as you Wet

Edit: I know you don't always offer your personal opinion, and usually stick with facts - but what do you think of this? Do you think the employers were morally/ethically justified in letting these employees go?

[BobLoblaw]

IMO, LIFE's decision to terminate employment of these workers was justified both legally and morally. As representatives of their company, it is incumbent on them to not publicly behave in such a manor that negatively affects the company's reputation and brand.

Allwest Insurance's firing of the girl who flashed Ben Eager at the penalty box was justified.

Big & Tall's firing of the guy who posted a trolling Facebook message implying Amanda Todd deserved to die was justified.

The numerous companies who fired employees caught rioting and looting in the Vancouver riots were justified.

Just because you may be off company hours, it doesn't mean you stop being an employee of the company during that time.

[Mastaj]

Whose morals or ethics apply to this situation? They differ between individuals which is why in a secular society we are governed by law and not varying interpretations of .morals or ethics.

[KelownaCanucksFan]

what they did was stupid, immature and disrespectful to all veterans.

That being said; the company is over reacting and will probably and justly be sued, they should have to pay, their coompany could have taken some other disciplinary action instead. Yes those girls did something dumb but not illegal, not enough to fire someone without cause. People make mistakes everyone here who says being fired is what they deserve should remember that they weren't fired for every mistake they made at work, no one is perfect. This is why social media is bad, a bunch of anonymous losers hiding behind a keyboard complaining led to two people losing their jobs and possibly careers, that's not right or fair.