When Mining Workers' Social Media, Take an Evenhanded Approach
Employers may be keeping a closer eye on employees' social media posts, but crude and offensive posts don't always provide enough legal standing to discipline or terminate an employee, lawyers say.
July 24, 2019 at 11:30 AM
3 minute read
As employees' social media posts grab global attention for all the wrong reasons, more employers are auditing workers' social media profiles to spot any activity that violates company policy.
Last week, after firing 13 police officers and placing 72 others on desk duty over their offensive social media posts, the Philadelphia Police Department announced it will implement a “mechanism” to audit officers' social media posts. Such social media mining is a proactive approach that more employers are implementing, said Mayer Brown partner Richard Nowak.
“I think [this] will be more common going forward with employers because of the significant publicity,” he said.
But as more employers examine their workers' social media trail, lawyers recommend they not target specific employees for monitoring to prevent certain discrimination and labor claims.
To be sure, First Amendment rights in the workplace only extend to government employees. For those employees, the U.S. Supreme Court has established a test to evaluate if the employee's speech addresses a matter of public concern and, if so, whether the employee's right to free speech outweighs their employer's interest in an efficient, disruption-free workplace.
For the vast majority who are employed by a private company, their unfair labor complaints are heard by the National Labor Relations Board, which doesn't grant First Amendment rights but provides an employee with a host of protected actions and language.
Still, private employers can run into a host of legal issues when mining their staff's social media. “It's one of those things that is easy for an employer to say, 'I'm a private employer [and] they have no First Amendment rights,' which is true but it's not so easy because so many statutes could be implicated and typically employees are getting upset about something related to the workplace,” said Jackson Lewis principal and co-leader of the firm's labor and preventive practices group Jonathan Spitz.
Spitz cited the National Labor Relations Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as some of the protections that shield employees from discrimination and harassment and provides other employment rights.
The five-person National Labor Relations Board under President Donald Trump's administration, however, has typically taken a pro-management stance on matters and is “much more lax than what the board was under [President Barack] Obama,” Nowak noted.
But even under a new administration, lawyers caution against targeting specific employees for a social media audit. Outside of a reactive search after an employee alleges a fellow worker sent harassing messages, Spitz said it's best to monitor everyone.
“If you are going to monitor social media, you should have an evenhanded system,” Spitz said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Whether to Choose State or Federal Court in a Case Involving a Franchise?
- 2Am Law 200 Firms Announce Wave of D.C. Hires in White-Collar, Antitrust, Litigation Practices
- 3K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
- 4'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
- 5Which Georgia Courts Are Closed Today?—Here's a List
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250