 August/September
2005 Issue Number 74
 Is
a monthly electronic newsletter which links current events and issues
to the daily challenges faced by fire and emergency services managers.
Current topics in the areas of leadership development, workplace diversity,
change management, and conflict resolution will be discussed.
We
hope that you find the information here useful and provocative.
Let us know what you think! If you'd like to subscribe to the newsletter,
please enter your email address in the box below.
enter your email
address
FDIC East October 4-8, 2005 Atlantic City, NJ
Women Chief Officers Leadership Conference October 20-23, 2005, Bucks County, PA. Go to www.womenfireofficers.org for more information.
Beware the Blog
When asked about blogs, some older people might think the subject is monsters from outer space. But everyone under a certain age knows that blogs are web logs: personal journals kept online, available for the world to see. And while many bloggers find the activity to be fun or a good way to stay in touch with friends, blogs that provide details about work can be a source of trouble for those who maintain them.
Consider the case of Peter Whitney, who worked for a division of Wells Fargo. Shortly after getting his job, he started posting a blog which included comments about coworkers and his job. After learning of his blog, his employer fired him. Such a reaction is not unique to this company. Other major companies such as Delta Airlines and Google have also fired and disciplined employees for work related commentary on personal web logs. In May, IBM unveiled specific blogging guidelines for its 329,000 employees. Workers who do not follow the guidelines can be fired.
The popularity of web logs is exploding in the United States. According to a report published this year, 20,000 new web logs are published daily and an estimated 10 million blogs will exist in the U.S. by the end of 2005. The majority of bloggers are under 30, male and computer savvy: the typical profile for newcomers to jobs in emergency services.
Some workers who have been fired for content on their web logs have sued their employers for violation of their First Amendment rights, or in at least one case, Title VII violations. These cases are pending.
Writing about work on a personal web log exposes both the writer and the employer to potential risk. At the lowest level, comments made about co-workers can lead to hurt feelings or damaged relationships. Potentially, such postings could also lead to formal complaints or legal action. Employers do not welcome the potential for their employees to divulge inside information about the workplace, even if such information is not explicitly protected. And bloggers themselves are sometimes hurt by their own postings, as employers are becoming more blog-conscious, and often check up on potential employees through their online writings. Since blogs are notoriously free-wheeling and uncensored, this could lead to some embarrassing moments in a job interview.
According to Nancy Flynn, executive director of the ePolicy Institute, the safest way to approach blogging at work may be to not do it at all. Certainly those who choose to represent themselves in blogs must keep in mind that anyone could see what they post, and that there could be consequences to their online actions.
Sources: The New York Times, July 24, 2005
USA Today, June 15, 2005
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia recently upheld a ruling that Anheuser-Busch violated the National Labor Relations Act by failing to bargain with the union before installing and using hidden surveillance cameras on the job site. Several employees were fired as a result of the secret video. The court remanded the case back to the National Labor Relations Board, saying that its previous ruling regarding reinstatement of the workers was inconsistent "when misconduct is discovered through unlawful means."
Source: Business and Legal Reports Inc. July 6, 2005
Expanding the Definition of Sexual Harassment
The definition of sexual harassment has gone through many permutations over the years since it was first identified at the federal level as an illegal workplace action in 1980. At first, only quid pro quo harassment was included in the law: an employee had to be the victim of a tangible employment action as a result of refusing to go along with sexual requests. Then in 1986, the concept of hostile environment harassment was added to the law. This addition recognized that an employee can be victimized by harassment in the workplace even if it does not result in firing, demotion or other job action. Now the California Supreme Court has added a new dimension to sexual harassment law: the concept of vicarious harassment.
The case concerned a prison supervisor's favorable treatment of women on the job with whom he was having sexual relationships. When a better qualified woman, Edna Miller (who was not involved with the supervisor), was passed over for a promotion in favor of one of the supervisor's lovers, Ms. Miller filed a complaint of hostile environment harassment against her employer. In response to her complaint, Ms. Miller said she was retaliated against, ostracized in the workplace, and assaulted by one of the women who was involved with the supervisor.
The employer, who had received favorable summary judgment in the lower court ruling, claimed that it was improper for the courts to get involved in "regulating personal relationships." The Supreme Court justices stated that "it is not the relationship, but its effect on the workplace, that is relevant under the applicable legal standard." They further explained that the ruling would not apply to an isolated case of workplace favoritism, but rather a widespread practice that had the effect of altering terms and conditions of employment.
This case, though only applicable in California, is having repercussions across the country. Workplace relationships are common: a recent study showed that 58% of employees had dated someone at work, up from 46% just two years ago. Among the 600 respondents to the survey, 14% said they had dated a boss or a supervisor and 19% had dated a subordinate. Careerbuilder.com, an online job network, got similar results with a survey it did among 1300 people. Employers worry about trying to monitor personal relationships, or prying into people's personal lives. Some legal analysts believe the ruling will result in more frivolous lawsuits. Even Gloria Allred, an attorney who frequently represents women in sexual harassment cases, said the decision was far-reaching.
Regardless of what they think of the ruling, employers in California will now have to deal with the reality of it. Such expansion of the parameters of sexual harassment underscores the need for good training, good communication, and above all, good leadership in the workplace.
Sources: The New York Times, July 24, 2005
Findlaw.com, July 25, 2005
©
Linda F. Willing, 2005
|
