Machiavellian said:
I did not notice I said public, I said it on purpose. Would it be any different if someone took a video of you out in public berating someone or doing something stupid and you lost your job for it. No matter the media used, if you are not actively working for a company or doing anything on company time then you are just an individual. So would you agree that if a company viewed your twitter post and saw that you got drunk, pulled over by the cops and put into jail, and fired you for it that's fair game. Same would be for Facebook or anything else. Where is the line drawn and how much are you so accepting of this practice. I keep reading about SJW all the time but it seems people just pick and choose what they consider SJW. So what you saying as a developer, if I post something that I do, its considered fair game for my employer to fire me because they disagree how I handled the topic in public. So basically what we are all saying is that you are always on the clock for your company no matter if you are on the Job or just speaking in general. I am not saying that this isn't the world we live in, I am saying people seem to be more accepting of it and thus cannot complain when its used for someone they do like. Its a double edge sword that bites on both ends. No one seem to ask was there a process. Was she just fired outright. What policies did she break and how many chances do you get. Nope, it was one and done but it only seems to be that way because the general people who support her getting fired has an ax to grind. If this was your favorite developer, I wonder if support would have been different. At Bolded: How exactly can that be proven. Even if it can be proven how can any company tie that to an employee unless it is their forum. Just because someone knows you work for a certain company doesn't exactly give them total rights to anything you say as affecting their business. Basically you just gave corporation to use that very line for anything they can consider as "Hurting" their brand and complete control over what you say, how you act, who you associate with and how you behave in any settings. Its one thing understand how things are, its totally another to just accept it as if it should be the norm. |
Well, I would say it strongly depends on the case. In this case if it was the first offense I would've preferred to offer the employee the chance to apologize, and only on the second strike it would be out. But not on the clock doesn't matter, if you argue so publicly, as it is the case with Twitter. It has nothing to do with SJW either. Roseanne Barr was fired and her show canceled about something she said on Twitter in her spare time. And roseanne can't really be labeled a SJW. In difference to the current case, Roseanne's tweet not even had to do anything with her work. Still she got fired and I agree with that.
So have you said something stupid drunk or so. I think your company isn't happy, but firing should be only viable on repeated offenses. In this case though Jessica Price attacked someone unprovoked. That is a bit more damning. I probably wouldn't have her fired if it was the first misstep and she is apologetic. Roseannes tweet was inexcusable and it would've tarnished the image of every company that kept her in employment after that.
So yes, stunts you do in your spare time can and should be punishable by your employer. Because I would starting to rethink consuming products of a company, if they work with people that do inexcusable stuff. We could discuss what acting is too much, but beware that Twitter is public and your words there can be associated with oyur company.
