The ability to connect with people via social media, and
share stories, images, and videos is truly astonishing. Through sites like
Instagram and Facebook, users can update their posts by the minute making it
possible for a story to go viral in seconds. But the power of social media can
come at a price, especially when people post via social media that don’t have a
place on the sites. There is a recent example of a company that had to take
action when their employees inappropriately shared images via social media. A Subway restaurant in Ohio fired two teen employees who posted vulgar photos to their
social networks. “In one of the photos,
a teen put his genitals on bread, and the other employee claims he froze his
own urine in a bottle” (Yost, 2013, para. 4). Not only were the employees
actions appalling and inappropriate, but given the establishment was a
restaurant, Subway also had health concerns to worry about. |
| image via google images |
I believe the two teens who posted these images were fully
aware of what they were doing, and the post was not an accident. In my opinion,
it’s most likely the case that the employees were trying to look cool to their
friends and brag about what they did at work. And ultimately this fault in judgment
led to these two employees to lose their jobs. I feel that the actions Subway
took were necessary and correct. From what I can tell, though, the company did
not issue any press releases or take any action to address the public. The main
actions taken were firing in the employees. The scandal resulted in “the
health department is investigating” the store as well (Yost, 2013, para. 4). I
feel that the company could have addressed the situation publicly through a
press conference or providing more details of the case.
Focusing on the 9 edicts, there isn’t one specifically that
relates to this situation. However, had the company had enforced policies about
using social media networks or mobile devices at work, this situation may have
been avoided, since the mobile devices were the avenue for these employees to
post something online.
If I were implementing social media policy for my
organization, I think there would need to be a clearly defined explanation of
how the use of social media would work for my organization, and what the
expectations of using social media while at work or as it links to the company’s
name. Two guidelines that apply to an employee’s personal use are that opinions
are largely protected and that employers may restrict employees’ commercial use
of company marks (Halpem, 2012). Employees have the right to free speech and they
are allowed to have opinions of the company, industry, and whatever else might
relate to the organization. However, that is why I feel that if the employee is
posting either on behalf of the company or they are mentioning the company,
then they need to clearly understand the policies in place when referring to
the company in the personal use. So while their rights should be protected, the
company’s logo and anything else that defines the company should also be
protected through the policies I would create.
Two guidelines relating to social media use when an employee
is representing the organization are that employers may prohibit employee “rants”
and confidentiality clauses should be narrowly tailored (Halpem, 2012). There
are trade secrets that exist in my company, and if an employee does decide to
go on a rant and/or share those secrets (which are not theirs to share) the
company should be allowed to take action against that employee. At that point,
they are demonstrating their freedom of speech, sharing information that is not
theirs, and therefore the organization can act.
References:
Halpem, S. (2012, December 3). When is Your Company's Social
Media Policy an Unfair Labor Practice? Recent NLRB Decisions Offer Long-Awaited
Guidance for Employers | The National Law Review. Retrieved February 20, 2015,
from
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/when-your-company-s-social-media-policy-unfair-labor-practice-recent-nlrb-decisions-
Yost, D. (2013, July 22). Subway Restaurant Workers Fired
After Allegedly Posting Lewd Photos. Retrieved from http://www.nbc4i.com/story/22904250/subw
Hi, Allie. Thanks for “exposing” the Subway issue this week in our group discussion. Obviously the subway employees posting inappropriate photos did not just expose themselves, but also exposed the restaurant to be subject to investigation by the Health District. In addition, I would be interested to know if the location that these photos were taken in received any negative impact to sales.
ReplyDeleteThe use of social media in this case created widespread attention to an act that may have otherwise been limited to a few of the teen’s friends. It may have given the organization the opportunity to terminate the teens more immediately than they would have had social media not been in the mix. Number 9 in the NLRB rules does allow for the termination of the boys, but regardless this act being done on the job would have resulted in immediate termination regardless of how the news reached management of this Subway location. I also feel that you pointing out that it was not only the act that was exposed on social media, but if the social media policy were written with #9 in mind, the teens may have been violating a rule of social media and mobile device use at work (Halpern, 2012).
I think one of the most profound things that I read in your blog was in regards to the need for “a clearly defined explanation of how the use of social media would work for my organization, and what the expectations of using social media while at work or as it links to the company’s name” (Ritacco, 2015). I think communication is key to making sure policies are executed appropriately by employers and followed by associated.
Thanks for adding to our discussion this week and thanks for sharing Subway’s issue with inappropriate acts exposed through social media!
Halpern, S. (2012, December 3). When is Your Company's Social Media Policy an Unfair Labor Practice? Recent NLRB Decisions Offer Long-Awaited Guidance for Employers | The National Law Review. Retrieved February 25, 2015 from http://www.natlawreview.com/article/when-your-company-s-social-media-policy-unfair-labor-practice-recent-nlrb-decisions-
Ritacco, A. (2015, February 28). Subway. [Blog]. Retrieved from http://agrinnyc.blogspot.com/
Hi Allie,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great example. Although, I'd have to disagree that none of the edicts apply here - I would say that the 9th edict applies in this case. It states that, "Employers remain entitled to enforce important workplace policies, even in the context of social media. Employers retain the right to prohibit...sabotage and/or abusive and malicious activity," (Halpern, 2012). As we know from David Meerman Scott, "We're talking about people here. Employees do silly things," in this case, it wasn't just silly, it was downright stupid, and disgusting (Scott, 2013). Subway definitely took the proper action to terminate these two dimwits, who I hope learned a valuable lesson. I agree that there should've been more about how they handled it publicly. This is the type of situation you don't just sweet under the rug - as a consumer, I would want to have a little more closure. Good post!
Sources
Halpem, S. (2012, December 3). When is Your Company's Social Media Policy an Unfair Labor Practice? Recent NLRB Decisions Offer Long-Awaited Guidance for Employers | The National Law Review. Retrieved February 20, 2015, from http://www.natlawreview.com/article/when-your-company-s-social-media-policy-unfair-labor-practice-recent-nlrb-decisions-
Scott, D. M. (2013). The new rules of marketing & PR: How to use social media, online video, mobile applications, blogs, news releases, & viral marketing to reach buyers directly (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Hi Allie – great post and example! I think that messing with people’s food, thus causing increased health inspections and getting the FDA involved takes it to a whole different level. I used the example of Gilbert Gottfried making insensitive Twitter remarks after the tsunamis in Japan as my example. Although this was inappropriate and hurtful to many people, it doesn’t compare to the possible physical harm that messing with people’s food can cause. Do you believe there is a difference in how companies need to establish guidelines for social media use in food establishments versus others? Would you have handled the situation any differently and if so, how?
ReplyDeleteHi Andrew,
DeleteThanks for the reply. I definitely think there needs to be some type of additional policies regarding social media for restaurants and food establishments. Given the implications of what can happen if there are mishaps with employees, I feel its necessary. If I was managing the Subway scandal, I probably would have had a press conference or addressed the situation in the public eye, so that the public knew we as a company were working on investigating the situation. I for one, cannot feel comfortable eating at a Subway after seeing these posts and reading about them online. So for the sake of the brand, I think it's important that the company respond publicly.
Thanks!
Allie
Hi Allie,
ReplyDeleteIt seems Subway has recently had its fair share of challenges. Between this event and the exposure of one of their bread ingredients being a chemical used in yoga mats, the company should definitely consider doing a new integrated campaign to regain some of the customers they may have lost.
Regarding this particular situation, it all relates to store operations and corporate policy. Companies should recognize that most people have access to the internet and social media sites right in their pockets. I heard someone call their phone a minicomputer. That's exactly what smartphones are! Companies need to integrate policies restricting employees use of their phones for personal use, including social media, during their shifts or business hours. This is so important especially when employees are young and may not realize the consequences of their actions. Adult employees may lash out against the company or just make dumb choices. I wonder where the manager of the store was when all of this took place? Either way, more companies need to be prepared to prevent these type of situations from happening and plan of action if they do happen to occur.
This is a great example of when employees should lose their jobs. It also makes you wonder how much similar behavior takes place at fast food restaurants all over the country but isn't shared on social media and thus never results in actions against the guilty parties. I wouldn't say that Subway was hurt all that much as a brand because of this incident but I'm not going to be running out to grab a sandwich there anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteHi Allie,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post this week. I want to echo what Mandy said in that social media allowed this disgusting display to circulate outside a few of the teenagers' friends, and I think in this example that we should be thankful that social media was able to expose this behavior and allow Subway to terminate the employees. As much as social media may encourage stupidity like this, (think about the "Do it for the Vine" mentality), it also makes it very difficult for employees to get away with such crude behavior. Social media makes people more accountable for their actions.