You are extremely naive if you think that anything posted on the internet can be classed as "Private".
Advise on returning to work after maternity
- Thread starter Neodite
- Start date
You are extremely naive if you think that anything posted on the internet can be classed as "Private".
here's CCTV footage of how it went down
http://www.grapheine.com/bombaytv/movie-uk-f1af46a75230838f0bdf5b9a495c43a9.html
http://www.grapheine.com/bombaytv/movie-uk-f1af46a75230838f0bdf5b9a495c43a9.html
Yup, I'm sorry to say that your wifes job is now a dead duck.
Its not just Facebook either. Its anything on the internet.
Its happened to me, I made a negative post (nothing crude or involving swearing etc) on an internet forum about a work colleague. I didnt use my name, or their name, or indeed the company name. However, one of my work colleagues who knew that I was that particular user on the forum printed it out and handed it to my superiors.
I was hauled in, given a disciplinary over it and made to apologise to the person in question.
To be honest, I was astonished. To me it was no different to a mate in a pub in the evening asking me how my day had been, and me telling them with a little rant. But it seems thats not the case. Just cant seem to say much on the internet these days...anywhere..even on forums of an obscure website. Even with absolutely no identifying indicators.
In the end it didnt matter too much as I left shortly after for a higher position at a better establishment, but still to this day I am surprised about it.
So , lesson is, best be careful what you all say on this forum. You never know when expressing your feelings or mentioning your work in any negative way might bite you.
Its not just Facebook either. Its anything on the internet.
Its happened to me, I made a negative post (nothing crude or involving swearing etc) on an internet forum about a work colleague. I didnt use my name, or their name, or indeed the company name. However, one of my work colleagues who knew that I was that particular user on the forum printed it out and handed it to my superiors.
I was hauled in, given a disciplinary over it and made to apologise to the person in question.
To be honest, I was astonished. To me it was no different to a mate in a pub in the evening asking me how my day had been, and me telling them with a little rant. But it seems thats not the case. Just cant seem to say much on the internet these days...anywhere..even on forums of an obscure website. Even with absolutely no identifying indicators.
In the end it didnt matter too much as I left shortly after for a higher position at a better establishment, but still to this day I am surprised about it.
So , lesson is, best be careful what you all say on this forum. You never know when expressing your feelings or mentioning your work in any negative way might bite you.
Seems strange that anything like this could hold up, i could easyly copy a workmates profile on facebook, and set the status as something, print it out and get them sacked?
Shes going to be ringing HR later to complain about her getting dragged into town and being bullied to resign, see if that helps..
Infact im tempted to make a copy profile of her manager and print out some status updates
Shes going to be ringing HR later to complain about her getting dragged into town and being bullied to resign, see if that helps..
Infact im tempted to make a copy profile of her manager and print out some status updates
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2006
- Posts
- 1,440
- Location
- Nottingham
right so in summary there are 2 issues - is the disciplinary thing a hearing in front of a panel - i'm assuming they must have classed it as gross misconduct which is why she fears the sack yes? or is it a written warning? unless she's already had her final warning then she can't be sacked unless it is gross misconduct (if i understand it right)
unless she is being sacked (which is her own stupid fault really) then it can't influence the maternity thing and hours. i thought from a maternity leave point of view that the company had to make every effort to accomodate the return to work. it would appear that they haven't so if they sack her then they could be in a bit of trouble.
i'd tell her not to give up on the maternity thing, apologise for the facebook thing saying it was motherly hormones/moment of madness/baby had been up all night and not well etc, keep the job then wait until they sack her for not doing the hours then head to an industrial tribunial.
unless she is being sacked (which is her own stupid fault really) then it can't influence the maternity thing and hours. i thought from a maternity leave point of view that the company had to make every effort to accomodate the return to work. it would appear that they haven't so if they sack her then they could be in a bit of trouble.
i'd tell her not to give up on the maternity thing, apologise for the facebook thing saying it was motherly hormones/moment of madness/baby had been up all night and not well etc, keep the job then wait until they sack her for not doing the hours then head to an industrial tribunial.
Before she posted on face book she would have been able to walk all over them in court because, I believe, it is illegal for a firm not to offer a person the same job when they come back from maternity/paternity leave. However because of the gross misconduct thing the carpet has been swept out from under her feet.
If the status wasn't a print screen just get her to delete the comment and then no one is the wiser.
If the status wasn't a print screen just get her to delete the comment and then no one is the wiser.
Is swearing at your manager gross misconduct tho? I could go over to my manager now (hes sitting over from me) and call him a **** and altho it would be very stupid of my, id just end up with a final written warning (I asked him what he would do)
So would calling somone a name on the internet realy be worse than calling it to their face?
And yes if she does not get sacked she will continue to refuse to resign and try and get them to accomidate her atleast a small bit
So would calling somone a name on the internet realy be worse than calling it to their face?
And yes if she does not get sacked she will continue to refuse to resign and try and get them to accomidate her atleast a small bit
From the OP it sounds like the company did indeed offer her old job back to her - that is all they are forced to do.
They don't have to change hours to suit, legally the same job needs to be there.
But once the public posting started.....
They don't have to change hours to suit, legally the same job needs to be there.
But once the public posting started.....
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 3,202
- Location
- Belfast
Sounds to me like the business want to get rid of her and they know that if they don't give her the hours she wants and she's not going to keep the full contract then she has no other choice but to leave which is what they want.
The Employment Act 2002 gives the right for fathers and mothers to ask for flexible working arrangements if they have children under 6 or disabled children under 18 however I'm not sure if there's anything in there that says they must make these arrangements. As far as I know this is the only thing your partner would have to go on, but with the Facebook comment she has given a reason for them to get rid of her without even taking the real reason behind it into consideration. Workplaces are taking social networking sites very seriously. Only last week we had to sign a contract saying we weren't allowed to mention anything against the company or any customers or employees in it.
The Employment Act 2002 gives the right for fathers and mothers to ask for flexible working arrangements if they have children under 6 or disabled children under 18 however I'm not sure if there's anything in there that says they must make these arrangements. As far as I know this is the only thing your partner would have to go on, but with the Facebook comment she has given a reason for them to get rid of her without even taking the real reason behind it into consideration. Workplaces are taking social networking sites very seriously. Only last week we had to sign a contract saying we weren't allowed to mention anything against the company or any customers or employees in it.
Those are your companies rules and also only what your boss is saying to you now, the situation may be radically different if you actually said that too him in a heated angry way was your wife did on her Facebook status. I have worked in companies where people have been told to clear there desks after swearing at the boss.
The company are obliged to offer her the same job back on the same terms, which they did, and she is entitled to ask for part time working but the company don't have to accomadate this if it is not practical.
Which they have done! Read the post.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
I'm a personal cases rep for my Union.
In regards to the return to work after maternity. You are allowed to request a reasonable change to hours. I would state 16 hrs would be reasonable. However the employer has no duty to grant it, just a requirement to seriously consider it and have valid reasons for declining it. Valid reasons for declining could be amount of work, length of time needed to train a replacement, continuity (i.e. customers like to see the same face everyday). Without more details I cannot comment further whether the companies decision was fair or not.
Re the Facebook issue.
I wouldn't touch her case with a barge pole if it came to me!
Union guidelines on the use of facebook is that employees are entitled to a certain level of privacy. Your employer cannot come into your home to check on you therefore they shouldn't use facebook as a way of checking up on you. However, Unions recognize that a companies public face is wider than just the office you work at. Therefore any disparaging remarks about your employer could bring the company into disrepute and the company would be entitled to take disciplinary procedures, in a similar manner if you are arrested for drink driving, drunk and disorderly, ABH etc. Ignoring the moral objections to actions resulting from comments made on facebook, they are legally perfectly entitled to take the action they are taking.
In this case though your partner has utterly crossed the line and committed an act or harassment or bullying (it flies both ways - it's not just managers than can be ****s) and tbh, even if she has union representation at her workplace, they'll tell her to take a running jump, and quite deservedly so.
In regards to the return to work after maternity. You are allowed to request a reasonable change to hours. I would state 16 hrs would be reasonable. However the employer has no duty to grant it, just a requirement to seriously consider it and have valid reasons for declining it. Valid reasons for declining could be amount of work, length of time needed to train a replacement, continuity (i.e. customers like to see the same face everyday). Without more details I cannot comment further whether the companies decision was fair or not.
Re the Facebook issue.
I wouldn't touch her case with a barge pole if it came to me!
Union guidelines on the use of facebook is that employees are entitled to a certain level of privacy. Your employer cannot come into your home to check on you therefore they shouldn't use facebook as a way of checking up on you. However, Unions recognize that a companies public face is wider than just the office you work at. Therefore any disparaging remarks about your employer could bring the company into disrepute and the company would be entitled to take disciplinary procedures, in a similar manner if you are arrested for drink driving, drunk and disorderly, ABH etc. Ignoring the moral objections to actions resulting from comments made on facebook, they are legally perfectly entitled to take the action they are taking.
In this case though your partner has utterly crossed the line and committed an act or harassment or bullying (it flies both ways - it's not just managers than can be ****s) and tbh, even if she has union representation at her workplace, they'll tell her to take a running jump, and quite deservedly so.
How does that work if the company involved is not named? Can you bring someone into disrepute if the general populace have no idea who you are talking about?
Interestingly, how far could such a ruling go? If my mate/husband/wife in the pub that night asks me how my work day was, and I answer that my day has been crap because John X at work has been treating me like crap etc etc. If someone stood at that bar overhears and tells his friend who also works at the same company, would this apply?
Are we digging ourselves into a situation where we must only talk to our friends and family within the confines of our own homes...and hope that nobody walks past the window and overhears?
Its a strange one for me, I can understand if I am stood in the street shouting out that working for the Royal Mail is crap. But seems a little over the top if I am making a forum post on a forum which requires you to be registered in order to view the posts, so although the net is of course public, its not as public as it could be.
I dont know...I'm just never a big fan of what I perceive as censorship.
OcUK can be pretty damn annonymous. Well, when Tefal and co. aren't around
If you wanted too and thought about it, you could leave minimal information and signup under no known aliases, fake email - and there you go - annonymity bar your I.P.
Facebook = open site accessed publicly where most people will leave information and comments/whatever. My FB is private, I only have real friends/people I know on there and I keep it minimal. EVEN STILL - I wouldn't post something about my boss being a **** on there. It's common sense 101.
As someone said, don't post on the internet unless you would be happy to post the same thing with your face&name next on a billboard in a city centre.
She has no one to blame but herself and her snidey "friend".
Can't offer any more advice but try to think things through a little more before acting. No need to post every little thing on FB.
On a more positive side, Good luck to you guys with work & baby, if she does lose the job it sounds like the manager is a douche and the company aren't willing to accomodate her anyway, so **** them
Depends, if there were work colleagues on her friends list, then it's obvious who they work for. It's very hard to completely hide who your employer is from people if you talk about work at all.
That one's a little too far, but if the friend who works at the same company overheard and raised a complaint, then yes, it would already be potential disciplinary action.
Not really, that situation would not constitute a public place or statement.
Its not censorship as such, but part of your work agreement. Remember employment is a contract between two entities (usually a company and an individual) to do certain things. As part of that you may agree not to do certain things, which may impact or limit your behaviour both in and outside the workplace. Usually the more strict the agreements, the better the benefits associated with the role.
Would that need to be actually present within your contract? Because when I worked for the company who disciplined me for making a negative post on a "private" forum (a post in which I didnt name myself, any other employees, the company name or even which city/country I was in), I certainly didnt have anything in my contract which said that I could not speak or write negatively about the company.
The contract would almost certainly have a clause about bringing the company into disrepute, which is most likely what was used. Many companies are now making explicit clarifications that this clause covers online activity.
Is it bringing a company into disrepute if the company is unnamed? Surely the "public" wouldnt know which company the post was made about, so it can hardly be bringing it into disrepute (or vice versa gaining it any repute)?
This is where it gets really complicated, and very much becomes case by case. If you'd never posted there before, and no-one had any idea who you were, who you worked for etc, then it would be very difficult to get a disciplinary to stand up at tribunal.
If, however, your previous posting history would allow identification of your employer one way or another through a bit of searching/reading then the situation changes and it becomes much more likely to make the action stick.
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2008/06/20/46378/protecting-your-companys-reputation.html