U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Out West
20,900 posts, read 15,662,694 times
Reputation: 24416

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by texan2yankee View Post
I agree, however, what is the statute of limitations for want of a better term for inappropriate behavior that "reflects on an employer"? I mean some people are twittering and facebooking from an early age.
Once they become an adult. Anything from that point on is fair game. If you are 18 years old and post pics of yourself drunk off your backside, I'm not going to hire you. If you make comments like the hag in your article, I'm definitely not going to hire you. If you post racist comments, I'm not going to hire you. If you are constantly cursing up a storm, calling women "b**ches" and "ho*s", I'm not going to hire you. If you post pics of yourself smoking weed, I'm not going to hire you. If you post about a fight you got in to, giving your 5 year old kid brother alcohol because you thought it was funny to watch him stumble around, you post a video of yourself acting in any way inappropriately towards a child, (and this field is a big one), I'm not going to hire you. The list goes on.

Why do they do it?

Because they are stupid.

Many of them have never had to be accountable for their actions. They've been treated like they were all special, all hilarious, all gifted - their parents have done them a serious disservice by treating them that way. What these people don't realize is that once you get out in to the real world, no one else thinks you're special, hilarious, or gifted - because most of the time, you're not. If you truly were special, hilarious, and gifted, you wouldn't be wasting your time on social media talking about the dumb things you did, sharing photos of the dumb things you did, or putting up videos/vines of the dumb things you did.

Should they be fired? If what that person did makes my company look bad in any way, shape, or form: Yes. Absolutely.

People don't seem to realize that "delete" does not mean what they think it means. Once it's on the internet, it's ON the internet, and it's not going to go anywhere. The more stupid the situation, the more likelihood that someone took a screen capture, someone d/l the photos, someone d/l the video and those WILL be reposted all. over. the internet. Then of course, there's the "Wayback machine".

If you wouldn't want your grandmother seeing it, don't post it.

Social Media is very public, no matter what privacy settings you have. Unless you are Facebooking, Twittering, or messaging yourself, someone else is going to see it, and that someone else can take that and run with it.

 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:12 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the Midwest
626 posts, read 720,438 times
Reputation: 322
Crossing the line on Facebook is one of two things:


#1. If the employee gives too much information by talking about the workplace issue or situation OR


#2. If the employee trash talks and badmouths the company or people at the job.


If someone says that they had a stressful day at work or they are looking for career options, that wouldn't be crossing the line. But, of course, if someone actually tells people what happened at the workplace or if someone says something like "This job sucks" or "F**K this job", that would obviously be going way too far.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:13 PM
 
Location: The Jar
20,071 posts, read 13,869,969 times
Reputation: 36715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Once they become an adult. Anything from that point on is fair game. If you are 18 years old and post pics of yourself drunk off your backside, I'm not going to hire you. If you make comments like the hag in your article, I'm definitely not going to hire you. If you post racist comments, I'm not going to hire you. If you are constantly cursing up a storm, calling women "b**ches" and "ho*s", I'm not going to hire you. If you post pics of yourself smoking weed, I'm not going to hire you. If you post about a fight you got in to, giving your 5 year old kid brother alcohol because you thought it was funny to watch him stumble around, you post a video of yourself acting in any way inappropriately towards a child, (and this field is a big one), I'm not going to hire you. The list goes on.

Why do they do it?

Because they are stupid.

Many of them have never had to be accountable for their actions. They've been treated like they were all special, all hilarious, all gifted - their parents have done them a serious disservice by treating them that way. What these people don't realize is that once you get out in to the real world, no one else thinks you're special, hilarious, or gifted - because most of the time, you're not. If you truly were special, hilarious, and gifted, you wouldn't be wasting your time on social media talking about the dumb things you did, sharing photos of the dumb things you did, or putting up videos/vines of the dumb things you did.

Should they be fired? If what that person did makes my company look bad in any way, shape, or form: Yes. Absolutely.

People don't seem to realize that "delete" does not mean what they think it means. Once it's on the internet, it's ON the internet, and it's not going to go anywhere. The more stupid the situation, the more likelihood that someone took a screen capture, someone d/l the photos, someone d/l the video and those WILL be reposted all. over. the internet. Then of course, there's the "Wayback machine".

If you wouldn't want your grandmother seeing it, don't post it.

Social Media is very public, no matter what privacy settings you have. Unless you are Facebooking, Twittering, or messaging yourself, someone else is going to see it, and that someone else can take that and run with it.
Exactly! Great post!!
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Out West
20,900 posts, read 15,662,694 times
Reputation: 24416
Quote:
Originally Posted by marigolds6 View Post
One piece of nuance missing here...

She was not fired for her post on social media.
She was fired for the post by the restaurant owner on social media. He took a private message from her to him, screen shot it, posted up his reply, and then widely disseminated that. (Notice that her post is way too long to have been a tweet. It was clearly a private message, via email or facebook private message, from her directly to him.)

It was his post, not her post, that went viral.
She was fired/let go for HER message that she sent off.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:17 PM
 
16,724 posts, read 13,858,582 times
Reputation: 41017
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
I find it offensive to call a human a heifer. You should be fired.

See how that works?
Moo moo, Buckeroo.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:18 PM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,841 posts, read 6,997,123 times
Reputation: 13779
Quote:
Originally Posted by texan2yankee View Post
I used this news story as an example only. My questions are regarding posting on the social media in general.

I'm trying to understand if some people do not understand the potential consequences, csd? And if they do, do they ever wonder if something written in 2016 on social media will be forever on the web and could have consequences in 2026?

Writing an inconsiderate post about another person or even something politically correct and 'socially acceptable' may not be PC and 'socially acceptable' in 10 years.
Back in the Stone Age before personal computers, the Internet, and social media, the rule was that you never wrote down anything you would be ashamed for your mother to read. Update that advice for the web and social media, and it's still the best advice you can get for free.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:22 PM
 
Location: In a vehicle.
4,613 posts, read 2,850,599 times
Reputation: 7406
I posted this on another group as a laugh, but would this be worthy of being fired?

I got off my "Normal" 3 pm - 11 pm shift and this was on my window

http://www.city-data.com/forum/attac..._095223-3-.jpg

I discussed this on another site and they all said "Don't go pubic unless you want to lose your job"...frankly, I really wouldn't care. I'd collect UI no matter what as it's NOT a company violation to show them in a bad light.

But I'm not going public.....yet.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:27 PM
 
3,279 posts, read 3,811,974 times
Reputation: 6149
Default It Should Be Against the Law

I don't think people should be fired for what they post on social media. In fact, I think it should be against the law to do this, and I don't care if it's a "right to work" state, it should be against the law anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ummagumma View Post
The problem here is the blurring of lines between work and private life. The employers should not owe you after you end your workday. They should not be in control of your private life other than requiring that you are law abiding and don't do drugs. What's next, firing people over making political statements that don't match company's views ?

How is checking an employee's Facebook page different from sending private investigators to follow her or him around and watch from the street what's going on inside their homes ? The technology is different but it's the same principle. Creepy and invasive.
Ummagumma nails it, and people like this are the ones who should be the bosses of a company. He/she and/or another said something to the effect of "otherwise how is this different than Henry Ford sending out PIs to see if his employers were attending church on Sunday?" Exactly.

My time is MY TIME, and I don't think I'm compelled to keep it private and under lock and key. To have to censor what I say on MY TIME is to make me a 24/7 unpaid PR representative. As long as I do the job I am paid to do on THEIR time, that is all that matters.

I am thinking of the teacher who was fired for being seen in a photo taking a sip of wine WHILE ON VACATION, in another country. I have the good sense to realize teachers are people too, and have the RIGHT to do whatever they want, short of selling drugs or prostitution, to have their own freaking life outside of school--AND they have the right to fully enjoy this activity by taking photos of themselves, say, enjoying the Bahamas in their bathing suits so that friends of theirs can share in their joy. They are NOT obligated to not take photos of themselves enjoying their vacation and/or keep them under lockbox because of uptight idiots who think that somehow them being living breathing human beings on their own time somehow taints their fitness to teach. To think that it does is just stupid. They're not 24/7 unpaid representatives of my school district.

I could see exceptions for "high profile" people such as, say, Tim Cook or Bill Gates, people who are extremely well known and the "face" of a multi-billion dollar corporation. If this were the 1980s, I'd say Lee Iacocca would also be such a person, he was on TV commercials several times every day as the well known "face" of Chrysler Corporation. I hardly find it appropriate, however, that someone who, say, is a filing clerk for a local school "represents" the school with what they do on their own time. So long as they can file and they behave as they should at work, THAT and ONLY THAT is what matters. Heck, I was once the filing clerk of a school by day and a disc jockey of a strip club by night, and people KNEW this--but so long as I contorted myself appropriately in the office environment, all was fine, as it should've been.

Companies today aren't content to honor this, though, even when people take steps to limit their audience, hence the tendency some companies had towards asking applicants for their social media passwords so they could even see their PRIVATE post. My understanding is much of this has been made illegal, as well it should.

They should do the same here.

Last edited by shyguylh; 01-08-2016 at 12:41 PM..
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:29 PM
 
16,785 posts, read 19,817,253 times
Reputation: 33239
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1 View Post
For years, schools and parents have been warning those coming up that there is a risk involved in posting on Facebook. People looking for jobs, those who are employed, people with children, all risk losing what they have based on what they may be posting.

Right or wrong, once you decide to make your activities and opinions public, they become fair game. Anyone who lacks this type of common sense isn't someone I would want working for me.

In this specific case, she went on a rant about someone she said passed out due to drugs, and was whining that her party spent $700 and wasn't getting enough attention at the restaurant, adding that she guessed someone with a drug problem is more important than those still spending money in that establishment. The partner of the restaurant replied that it was a 70 year old woman suffering a heart attack and he was happy to hear the whiner wouldn't be returning because she made one of the waitresses cry and isn't the type of patron they want. He got a lot of replies backing him.

Should she have been fired for this? I'm guessing this special snowflake was just as whiny and demanding at work, and this was just the final straw.
The younger people don't seem to get this.

Awhile back there was a thread on here by a young woman who got fired for badmouthing a coworker on FB.

She honestly couldn't get the difference between badmouthing someone to another person in a conversation(that you could always deny) and posting remarks online.

She thought it was the same thing.

It went over her head, sad really.
 
Old 01-08-2016, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Los Awesome, CA
8,520 posts, read 4,798,824 times
Reputation: 3303
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
what if the employer doesn't agree with your interpretation of what is 'racist'?
Well my interpretation of racism is consistent to what should be considered common knowledge of unmistakable actions. If an employer doesn't agree it says more about them than it does about what took place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
it's the only scenario you bothered to mention
Yes, you are correct...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top