This isn't the best article on this story, but the gist of it is whether
your employee base is Union or non-Union, you better have policies in place
regarding their use of Social Networking 'tools' and computer systems... and
the policies should be NARROW rather t5han BROAD in scope.  And DO NOT try
to control their use of SN outside of work, unless the content they post is
"abusive, libelous, obscene or a fraudulent misrepresentation of fact"

http://tek.io/erlR0q

A little more meat here...

http://on.wsj.com/gjb8EV

This piece asks some of the lingering questions following this ruling that
employers need to determine how to address though, because they were NOT
answered in this ruling

(1) Whether an employee is engaged in concerted activity when posting on a
social media platform?

(2) What is protected and unprotected on social media, and do the same rules
that apply to verbal communications in the workplace apply to social media?

(3) Does it make a difference if the post is done during non-work time?

http://bit.ly/dOeczD

In any event, similar to the Supreme Court ruling last year on Quon v. Arch
Wireless, the ruling is NARROW, not BROAD and it applies to the specifics of
this case and this case only- it will not be used as a precedent for other
cases, it will only be cited to represent what was done in a similar case.  

As I mentioned earlier, it's time to start "polishing up your policies"
ESPECIALLY about use of these types of 'tools' during work hours on employer
owned equipment- you can go anywhere form completely disallowing it to
allowing it with caveats, but if you don't have a policy at all, don't plan
to be successful in your attempt to reprimand an employee's use.

Larry
[log in to unmask]
[Yes, it's really me =) ]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]