Facebook: The Employer in YourSpace

Contributed by Rebecca Chong

The social networking website Facebook has become an increasingly popular way to resolve the time consuming and financially intensive burden of socialising, and brings it straight to the monitors of the internet generation, including at work. Indeed, many employees whose companies do not restrict access to the internet while away the days surfing the web, posting pictures to their Facebook accounts and reconnecting with friends in the virtual world.

Employers are now divided between embracing this new opportunity for marketing on a global scale (even princess of pop Kylie Minogue has launched ‘KylieKonnect’ a social networking site), and a cautiousness bred from the early ages of the blog; which led to media horror stories of employees flaunting their right to free speech and publishing derogatory pieces about their employers for the world to see.

The line for the employer to draw depends on business objectives; but for every successful business, evaluating how to tailor employment practices for the changes brought on by the growing impact of online social networking is vital to development.

A free subscription to socialize for the employee may come at a heavy price to employers. A recent study by Peninsula found that companies in the UK lose £132 million a day in lost productivity to employees wasting valuable time on Facebook. The ease with which a lot of employees are able to browse the net inevitably gives rise to temptation to do so during work hours and for lengthy periods that would be impossible to expend on most other extra curricular activities. Only last month, Neath Port Talbot Council dismissed three of their employees for spending too much of their working day dealing on the auction site eBay.

Time wasters are not the only concern. Facebook and its kin enable employees to disseminate confidential information easily, albeit unwittingly. Through personal profiles which may include job details, they make themselves vulnerable to being targeted by unscrupulous ‘cyber sharks’, or by competing businesses hoping to learn from the eyes and ears of the opposition.

Beyond inadvertently revealing information that could be detrimental to an employer’s business, personal networking pages enable employees to publicly criticise their employer to a wide audience. Argos recently dismissed Tom Beech for gross misconduct in creating the Facebook group entitled: ‘I work at Argos and can’t wait to leave because it’s shit.’ Another group was created by an ex-employee of ‘118 118’ directory inquiries in which members posted insults about customers; some claiming to have even taken the numbers of annoying callers and written them on the walls of public toilets. Even Scotland Yard is dealing with reports of videos posted on Facebook, which reveal uniformed officers performing a mock strip tease.

The popularity of sites such as MySpace, and YouTube, particularly among children and teens, have renewed discussions on the problem of cyber-bullying; but this is an issue which should not be confined to the playground. Bullying, or victimisation, is a very serious issue for employers, as beyond the moral and practical aspects of ensuring the happiness and therefore the productivity of a workforce, employers can also be made vicariously liable to a victim of grievous behaviour perpetrated by another employee; which may mean hefty litigation costs for the employer. It is estimated that bullying costs UK businesses £18 billion per year, and with the interactive site as an additional potential forum for bullying in the workplace, this figure could be set to rise.

Nintendo’s discovery of employee Jessica Zenner’s ‘Inexcusable behaviour’ blog in which Ms. Zenner posted insulting comments about female colleagues is a reminder to exercise caution. Being made aware of an employee who is bullying in the workplace will put an employer on notice of a potential grievance by a victim; meaning the employer has a duty to take active steps to remedy the situation, to avoid an accusation of liability. Ironically, a Facebook group has now been created by the Ban Bullying at Work campaign as a way of reaching out about the new challenges set by the use of social networking amongst the workforce.

It is this fear that interactive sites will be a platform for such detrimental activities, that has encouraged employers to either ban employees’ access to sites (a recent survey by Sophos – a company that deals with IT security and control – revealed that 50% employees work at organisations that have done this), or provide permission with strict restrictions. Employees discovered to have acted inappropriately have been dealt with strictly; and as Tom Beech was by Argos, been dismissed for their misconduct. Such measures, however, cannot be taken before proper steps for their implementation and enforcement have been established.

Some employees reprimanded for their activities on the net have expressed ignorance of internet and email policies within their organisations. Both Ms Zenner and Joe Gordon who famously dubbed his bookstore employer Waterstone’s as ‘Bastardstones,’ claimed not to have been informed about workplace policy on blogging. Employers should therefore take care in updating staff handbooks or IT and communications policies to inform employees of what their rights and duties are, and what disciplinary procedures are in place should there be a breach. Training for IT and HR staff will keep them abreast of employment-related developments that may help fine-tune internal policies to meet current business needs.

Caroline Doran, Head of Rooks Rider Employment Group explains:

“I am a firm believer that in employment related issues – prevention is better than cure. If the communication policy is circulated to all staff and they realize their access during working hours will be monitored and discussed, you should find an increase in productivity. If employees know that excessive (or any) Ebay, Facebook etc., activity or bringing an employer into disrepute can lead to dismissal – you will have won half the battle.”

There are benefits to the growth of net based activity for employers, however. The potential for using interactive tools on the web as a means of bringing in business has been recognised by Nissan and Adidas, amongst other companies, who have started to market and even recruit through the internet-based virtual world Second Life, created by Linden Lab. Similarly enterprising employers have been exploiting the search function on sites such as Facebook to weed out job applicants who post pictures or make references to drinking alcohol to excess, sexual promiscuity, using drugs or expressing racist or sexist views. It therefore comes as no surprise that the Lawn Tennis Association suspended two of its young tennis players on the basis of information about their extracurricular activities gathered from Bebo, another social networking site.

While using such sites in this way may be beneficial for employers, it is not without a drawback. Employers may be able to view prospective candidates’ religious views, age and sexual orientation on Facebook, which potentially leaves open scope for discrimination claims in the recruitment process. Employers who seek to use such means of research need to consider that the law on collecting personal information applies without exception to all forms of media, and potential job applicants should in turn be aware that they may be under the scrutiny of a tech-savvy employer.

Caroline Doran, Employment Law Expert at Rooks Rider states:

“In my view, people are naïve if they do not think that future employers will “Google” or “Facebook” them. Most employers value discretion and professional behaviour at all levels. Candidates may not be doing anything unlawful or that unusual by posting photographs or stories about their drinking, partying or sexual prowess. However, candidates who cannot see why this may adversely affect their employability regardless of the legal issues are likely to demonstrate a dangerous lack of commonsense.”

The employer’s reach on an employee’s web space may even extend beyond the ability to peruse, to actually owning its content. Work produced during company time is regarded as proprietary information by the employer, unless a contract states otherwise; and it is implicit therefore that this may apply to any content on an employee’s personal page. Creating a contact list on Facebook, and using it to publicize work related material for marketing purposes is not out of the question; particularly for those whose careers rely on the ability to self-promote their work such as journalists and designers.

As the work place expands into a burgeoning virtual arena, employers must be alert to extending and realigning current duties to and responsibilities of employees; to build a structure for managing the inevitable meshing of the real and virtual workplace, before their business becomes lost in cyberspace.