On August 22, 2014, the
National Labor Relation Board issued a new decision involving employees and
social media. In Triple Play Sports Bar & Grille, 361 NLRB
No. 31 (2014), the NLRB ruled that a Facebook discussion regarding an
employer’s tax withholding calculations and an employee’s “like” of the
discussion constituted concerted activities protected by the National Labor
Relations Act (“Act”). The Board also held that the employer’s internet
and blogging policy violated the Act.
In 2011, at least two employees discovered that they owed more in state income
taxes than they expected. Employees discussed the situation at work and
complained to their employer, Triple Play.
Prior to a staff meeting to discuss the employees’ issues, a former
employee posted the following “status update” to her Facebook page:
Maybe someone should do the owners of Triple Play a favor
and buy it from them. They can’t even do the tax paperwork correctly!!!
Now I OWE money…Wtf!!!
Several Facebook friends posted
comments in response to the status update, including two of Triple Play’s
employees. One employee commented, “I owe too. Such an
asshole.” A second employee “Liked” the former employee’s status update,
but posted no comment.
When Triple Play discovered
that two of its employees had participated in the Facebook discussion, it fired
them. The employees challenged their
termination, and the NLRB ruled in their favor, finding that the employees were
engaging in activities protected by the Act.
According to the NLRB, the
employees’ comments and "like" in response to the Facebook post
constituted a dialogue among employees about working conditions that was
protected by the Act. The NLRB determined that the evidence did not establish
that the discussion was directed to the general public. Although the record did
not establish the former employee’s privacy settings on Facebook, the NLRB
noted that the comments were posted on an individual’s personal page rather
than a company page providing information on its products or services. The NLRB
concluded that the employees’ comments were not "so disloyal as to lose
the Act’s protection" because they did not disparage their employers
products or services, or undermine its reputation. The Board also held that the
comments were not defamatory, but simply a statement of a negative personal
opinion of Respondent’s owner.
The NLRB also found that the employers’ Internet/Blogging
policy in the employee handbook violated the Act because it was overbroad and
unlawfully chilled employees in the exercise of their section 7 rights. The
policy warned that "engaging in inappropriate discussions about the
company, management, and/or co-workers, the employee may be violating the law
and is subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of
employment."
Employers need to tread carefully in disciplining
employees for their social media activities, as we have reported before. They should also review and update their
personnel policies to make sure that they are not inadvertently “chilling”
their employees protected rights.