By Cameron G. Shilling (originally published 10/17/2011)
A new decision has emerged prohibiting companies from adopting and enforcing policies that impact employees’ use of social media.
We recently posted a three part blog
discussing the role the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has adopted with respect to scrutinizing and invalidating policies
that expressly or impliedly apply to employees’ use of social media, and protecting employees from discipline or discharge
based on content they post to social media sites. Before our keyboard had cooled, however, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued another such decision in Karl Knauz Motors, Inc. d/b/a Knauz BMW
. The Karl Knauz
case underscores the points made in our prior blogs, and will serve to further bolster the NLRB’s self-appointed role as protector of social media freedom. Continue reading
By Cameron G. Shilling (originally published 10/7/2011)
Activity is concerted if it is “engaged in with or on the authority of other employees, and not solely by and on behalf of the employee himself.” This includes individual action if the employee “seeks to initiate, induce or prepare for group action” or raises “group complaints to the attention of management.” In fact, a mere “conversation may constitute concerted activity, even though it involves only a speaker and a listener,” as long as “it had some relation to group action in the interest of employees,
” according to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Meyers Industries, Inc.
The nature and breadth of this definition has significance to social media, which frequently involves on-line conversations about work between employees who are social media “friends.” Continue reading
By Cameron G. Shilling (originally published 10/5/2011)
The “mere maintenance” of a policy or practice that tends to chill employees’ exercise of their right to engage in concerted activity violates the National Labor Relations Act (Act),
according to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Lafayette Park Hotel
. Thus, if the policy or practice “explicitly restricts activities protected” by the Act, it is unlawful. In addition, as the NLRB found in Lutheran Heritage
, even if the policy or practice does not do so, it still is unlawful if any one of the following is true:
- Employees would reasonably construe the policy or practice to restrict or prohibit concerted activity.
- The policy or practice was promulgated in response to union activity.
- The policy or practice is applied to restrict protected concerted activity.
By Cameron G. Shilling (originally published 10/3/2011)
The leader of McLane’s Privacy and Data Security Group, Cam Shilling, has been identified and interviewed as a “Thought Leader” with respect to Data Privacy by Beagle Research Group, LLC. You can read the interview at http://www.beagleresearch.com/
Beagle Research Group, LLC is a market research and consulting firm focusing on front office business processes and white collar productivity. The company is led by Denis Pombriant, who is a well-known analyst and thought leader in the CRM space. Denis writes for CRM Magazine, Destination CRM, Search CRM, and CRM Buyer, conducts research in emerging areas of front office technology and business, and consults regularly to many of the leading companies in CRM.
By Cameron G. Shilling (originally published 5/27/2011)
The American Bar Association has published in its Journal of Employment and Labor Relations Law an article I recently wrote analyzing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Quon v. City of Ontario. The following is the opening passage from the District Court’s decision, and foreshadows the potential significance of this case with regard to data privacy issues.