FACEBOOK AT WORK

Facebook and the Law: The NLRB Got It Right
By Suzanne Lucas | February 10, 2011

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a press release about the much talked about Facebook Case.  The press release states:

    Under the terms of the settlement approved today by Hartford Regional Director Jonathan Kreisberg, the company agreed to revise its overly-broad rules to ensure that they do not improperly restrict employees from discussing their wages, hours and working conditions with co-workers and others while not at work, and that they would not discipline or discharge employees for engaging in such discussions.  (Emphasis is mine.)

You know what this is?  Nothing new and nothing exciting.  This is right in line with previous decisions regarding the rights of employee to talk about their salaries, hours and working conditions.  It makes perfect sense to consider Facebook and other social media as talking.  Because that is precisely what it is.

Now, this does not mean that the internet becomes a free-for-all.  If you could be fired for talking about it before, you can still be fired now for posting about it.  (And remember this is a union case, and doesn’t necessarily apply to the majority of American workers.)

This will not be the last we hear of Facebook and the law.  Other Facebook related cases are pending. You would be smart to be cautious about what you say and post on the internet, because unless you are saying something that is explicitly protected, your boss can still fire you.

UPDATE:  I got an e-mail from Nancy Cleeland, NLRB’s Director of Public Affairs.  She gave me permission to post her e-mail for further clarification:

    Thanks for your post on the Facebook settlement, which someone just forwarded to me. I just wanted to point out that even though the employee was represented by a union, our concerns related to the company’s social media policies and her postings were not union-related and would apply to any private-sector workplace that is under the NLRB’s jurisdiction.

So, this is farther reaching than I originally said.  I’ll be keeping my eye on any Facebook (and other social media) cases, and now I have a contact at the NLRB.

MY THOUGHTS

this is not local news and i have not heard of any local case like this one.  but i'm pretty sure this subject has caused companies (and individuals) headaches.  a lot of people are not mature enough to handle the freedom. 

i had a short project with a company whose employees are spending so much time on FB and youtube and all those internet sites.  we had to hire someone to block certain sites.  of course it caused some uproar. and i did not totally agree with the way it was handled. but it had to be done.

i think companies should immediately draw up internal policies on social networking while at work.  don't wait for it to fester. and come-up with some way for people to still do social networking during break time.  a kiosk would work.

WILL YOU BLAME SOCIAL NETWORKING?

blame social networking
By Loretta Park
Standard-Examiner Davis Bureau
Last updated
Saturday, January 22, 2011 - 8:26pm

http://www.standard.net/topics/schools/2011/01/22/school-fights-more-violent-some-blame-social-networking

School officials and police officers are concerned that fights in schools are becoming more aggressive and violent, and they believe e-mail, texts and social networking are at the root of that escalation.

Suzanne Buchanne, director of the at-risk population with Davis School District, said, "I'm seeing more assertive/aggressive behavior."

Although she could not pinpoint a specific reason why, Buchanne thinks e-mail, texts and social networking are playing a huge role.

In the past, when several students were mad at each other, they would go to class or go home and time would allow tempers and feelings to cool down, she said.

Now, students text and e-mail each other, as well as post remarks on social networking sites, such as Twitter, Facebook and MySpace, Buchanne said.

"Now, I've got all my buddies involved; and it's not just boys doing this either," she said.

Recently, an incident erupted at a Davis County high school in which social networking was believed to have played a role. A 19-year-old is still in an area hospital with a brain injury following the fight at Viewmont High School.

"He has a significant head injury," said Bountiful Police Chief Tom Ross.

Ross said the fight that landed Spencer Spilman in a hospital happened on Jan. 10 in the school's parking lot during school hours.

"Fights are not so shocking," Ross said. "But what is (shocking) is how quickly, in a short period of time, we had kids gathered in one place for a fight."

He blames social media and texting.

Students from Woods Cross and Bountiful high schools have been implicated in the fight.

News of fight

News that a fight would be taking place traveled in a matter of seconds, bringing students from neighboring cities to the parking lot, officials said. Police spent the next 48 hours, working overtime, investigating how many students were involved.

Three juveniles are facing aggravated assault charges, which in an adult court could be a second-degree felony. Also, at least six more students could be charged with misdemeanor offenses, such as disorderly conduct or fighting, Ross said.

But the aggressiveness and intensity of that fight, as well as another one earlier in January after a basketball game between Viewmont and Davis high schools, has officials concerned.

Consequences

Parents need to talk to their teenagers about the consequences of getting involved in fights, Buchanne said. It's not just bruises or black eyes, that will heal in a few days.

Instead, a student can find herself/himself without a school to attend, she said.

"They just don't think what the long-term consequences are," Buchanne said.

Students involved in fighting, as well as bringing weapons to a school, can be expelled for up to a year. If the incident is serious enough, the student could be expelled from every school in Davis School District, Buchanne said.

"And other districts can uphold that expulsion," Buchanne said. "I don't think people realize that. We don't have to offer them any services."

Principal Chris Keime at Fairfield Junior High School in Kaysville said students are taught at the beginning of the year how to deal with conflicts maturely and what the district's safe school policy is.

But social networks and electronics are making it difficult for students to deal with disagreements, he said.

"It's hard for kids, especially when their honor has been hurt," Keime said.

But at least statistically, kids might be getting the message.

Overall, fights or violent acts in schools are not increasing, but instead decreasing, not only in Davis School District, but statewide and nationally.

Decreases

According to a 2010 Bureau of Justice Statistics report, in 2003, 9.2 percent of ninth-grade to 12th-grade students, nationwide, reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property. In 2007, that percentage decreased to 7.8 and decreased again in 2009 to 7.7 percent.

In Utah, 7.3 percent of ninth-grade to 12th-grade students in 2003 reported being injured or threatened with a weapon on school property, according to the report. In 2007, that percentage increased to 11.4, but then dropped in 2009 to 7.7 percent.

Some of that decrease statistically could be attributed to the programs schools are putting in place.

Parents at North Layton Junior High volunteer to patrol the hallways during the lunch hour, which helps keep the peace, said Assistant Principal James Gordon.

Students are also told if there is a conflict or they feel afraid, they can find an adult -- a teacher or administrator -- who can help them get through the conflict.

Conflict resolution

Overall, most students are good kids; but several weeks ago friction between two North Layton students escalated due to social networking and texting, and there was a fight, he said.

Gordon said parents should teach their children how to resolve conflicts without using technology. One way is to use appropriate behavior when they disagree with someone else.

He said teenagers are very much aware of current events and see how adults handle disagreements.

"They can see there are very clear disagreements between Democrats and Republicans," Gordon said. "I agree with President (Barack) Obama that we should sit down at the table and talk about disagreements and what is the actual conflict."

Also, parents need to know what students are watching, not only on TV, but what they are seeing on the computer, what they are reading in books and who they are communicating with, Gordon said.

"I really feel technology is fast outpacing our students' judgement and they're dealing with adult issues," Gordon said.

Technology allows anyone, including teenagers, to hide behind a screen and become a different person, he said.

"What is written shocks not only the parents, but me," said Gordon, who has been an educator for 17 years.

MY THOUGHTS

i wonder if the same is happening here.  and i really don't think we should blame social networking sites.  we cannot stop the world from evolving.  and we should not stop trying to cope with these changes called 'development'. 

i know, it's a lot simpler for moms and dads and teachers when technology was not this advanced.  you tell your kid he/she is grounded and that's it. nowadays, you tell them they are grounded and you confiscate the computer and the cellphone,too.

this is why strong values have to be inculcated.  at home and in school.  strong values that are not just taught but exemplified.  values that will arm us and the kids against the evils of technology.

come to think of it, technology is not evil.  we are the ones who make it so.

NEW LAW IN GERMANY TO STOP CHECKING FACEBOOK

New Law to Stop Companies from Checking Facebook Pages in Germany

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,713240,00.html

Good news for jobseekers who like to brag about their drinking exploits on Facebook: A new law in Germany will stop bosses from checking out potential hires on social networking sites. They will, however, still be allowed to google applicants.

Lying about qualifications. Alcohol and drug use. Racist comments. These are just some of the reasons why potential bosses reject job applicants after looking at their Facebook profiles.

According to a 2009 survey commissioned by the website CareerBuilder, some 45 percent of employers use social networking sites to research job candidates. And some 35 percent of those employers had rejected candidates based on what they found there, such as inappropriate photos, insulting comments about previous employers or boasts about their drug use.

But those Facebook users hoping to apply for a job in Germany should pause for a moment before they hit the "deactivate account" button. The government has drafted a new law which will prevent employers from looking at a job applicant's pages on social networking sites during the hiring process.

According to reports in the Monday editions of the Die Welt and Süddeutsche Zeitung newspapers, Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière has drafted a new law on data privacy for employees which will radically restrict the information bosses can legally collect. The draft law, which is the result of months of negotiations between the different parties in Germany's coalition government, is set to be approved by the German cabinet on Wednesday, according to the Süddeutsche Zeitung.

Although the new law will reportedly prevent potential bosses from checking out a candidate's Facebook page, it will allow them to look at sites that are expressly intended to help people sell themselves to future employers, such as the business-oriented social networking site LinkedIn. Information about the candidate that is generally available on the Internet is also fair game. In other words, employers are allowed to google potential hires. Companies may not be allowed to use information if it is too old or if the candidate has no control over it, however.

Toilets to Be Off-Limits

The draft legislation also covers the issue of companies spying on employees. According to Die Welt, the law will expressly forbid firms from video surveillance of workers in "personal" locations such as bathrooms, changing rooms and break rooms. Video cameras will only be permitted in certain places where they are justified, such as entrance areas, and staff will have to be made aware of their presence.

Similarly, companies will only be able to monitor employees' telephone calls and e-mails under certain conditions, and firms will be obliged to inform their staff about such eavesdropping.

The new law is partially a reaction to a number of recent scandals in Germany involving management spying on staff. In 2008, it was revealed that the discount retail chain Lidl had spied on employees in the toilet and had collected information on their private lives. National railway Deutsche Bahn and telecommunications giant Deutsche Telekom were also involved in cases relating to surveillance of workers.

Online data privacy is increasingly becoming a hot-button issue in Germany. The government is currently also working on legislation to deal with issues relating to Google's Street View service, which is highly controversial in the country because of concerns it could violate individuals' privacy.

dgs

MY THOUGHTS

i think the best way to deal with privacy is to keep it. zip it.  the less private matters you share, the more privacy you keep.  it pays to be discreet and discriminating when sharing.  especially about your woes about other people. go ahead and share the fun times, the good things. the not-so-good should be kept private.  i should remind myself. all the time.

something you should know about the facebook "like" button

Facebook Turns "Like" Button Into Two-Way Street, Challenging Amazon for Buyer Data

By Chris Dannen
Jul 26, 2010

Facebook has just announced that it will allow publishers to contact users who have “liked” a page by inserting things into that user’s News Feed. The new feature may annoy users, and that may be the idea. By providing an incentive to use their “likes” wisely, Facebook will help turn the Like button — once a relatively blunt instrument — into a much more refined tool.

The Like button has a very specific purpose, but until now, it wasn’t very good at its job. Like Amazon’s (AMZN) huge catalog of past purchases, or Mint’s (INTU) new “saving” features, Facebook’s Like button is an experiment in purchase data: it’s meant to figure out what you, the user, would like to buy. But unlike Amazon’s data, which is based on actual things you bought, or Mint’s system, which asks you what you’d like to save up for, the data Facebook’s Like button collected was susceptible to all kinds of inaccuracies.

As Ad Age wrote in May:

[The Like button] is tough to choke down even for a data junkie at his weakest. If you show me a cheeseburger and ask me if I “like” it, at any given time of day, you are likely to get a different answer each time. Even when I like something, I may not feel compelled to click “like” unless, of course, there was some benefit to me.

As I argued at the time that the Like button would be susceptible to false “likes,” clicked out of boredom, or out of profligacy, or simply because someone set up an SEO-style system that encouraged people to “like” something for some kind of reward.

But making the Like button into a two-way street means that there are consequences to hitting every Like button in sight. It will turn the News Feed into a kind of inbox where publishers whose stuff you’ve liked can now try to push more of their wares in front of your eyeballs. (If you “liked” a product on the Sears (SHLD) site, for example, Sears could stick ads for more products into your Facebook News Feed.)

This disincentive may help insulate against illegitimate likes. But Facebook isn’t stopping there: it’s also providing tools to help add qualitative information to the button. The company has also built out the ability for the Like button to take comments and publish them in friends’ News Feeds, and has also improved analytics on the button. As the Facebook developer site says:

Now, when a user adds a comment to the iFrame version of the Like button, a larger, more prominent story will be shared with the user’s friends. In the past, we’ve seen comments result in increased distribution and referral traffic.

Even with these refinements, we’ve only begun to see the potential of the Like button.

MY THOUGHTS

well, this is something i don't like. the newsfeed gets crowded enough i have learned to use "hide". the "like" button can be good - if we use it wisely, just like everything else.

does social networking impact work

Does Social Networking Impact Work? Survey Reports


Social media sites are becoming some of the most heavily trafficked sites on the internet, including in the workplace, according to a recent poll. The survey, conducted by Right Management, gathered data from over 1,000 respondents concerning employee use of social networking sites during work hours.

While about half of the organizations reported blocking sites like Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter, others have decided to use the social networking sites as a business tool. Organizations are using the sites to reach out to clients, potential customers, employees, and job seekers.

Overall, 18 percent of respondents reported that social networking on the job often interferes with productivity, while 41 percent said that it sometimes does.

The survey also found some interesting statistics comparing the following criteria:

•Company Size: 51% of workers at an organization with 10,000 or more employees responded that it seldom interferes, compared to 41% at smaller organizations.

•Department: 62% of IT professionals said it seldom interferes, compared to 30% of sales professionals who reported that it often interferes.

•Age: 47% of workers aged 35-44 said that it seldom interferes, compared to 35% of those 18-24.

Organizations need to keep up with the growing presence of social media sites. A recent poll by Manpower suggested that as many as 75 percent of employers do not have a formal policy concerning the use of social networking sites. There are social media policies available on HR.BLR.com (subscription or trial-membership required):

MY THOUGHTS

better include this in the policy manual. it can really affect productivity. i think i won't mind when people can still come-up with excellent work even if social networking sites are not barred. but that's rare. i'm pretty sure, excellent professionals won't have time to use facebook at work. they will be too busy producing results.