Human resource professionals often cringe at employees’ use of social media. And for good reason. Employees have caused countless problems for their employers by publishing confidential information, attacking supervisors and co-workers, and all sorts public-relations nightmares. Admittedly, social media causes a whole set of problems for employers that employers are still attempting to navigate.
But social media isn’t all bad. In fact, there are lots of benefits to be realized from employee social-media use. Let me suggest one that doesn’t get a lot of attention. I call it, “the cream rises” thesis.
Although employers often think that they cannot discipline employees for what they do in their off-duty time, that, usually is not the case. Most times, employers can address conduct that occurs in cyberspace. In fact, sometimes employers must do so. And, despite the hype about the NLRB and its general distaste for social-media policies, the reality is that, most of the time, it is totally lawful to discipline employees for social-media conduct that conflicts with the employer’s policies or is in some way harmful to the employer.
The basic premise of my thesis is this: Instead of cringing when an employee acts like an idiot on social media, employers should rejoice—social media enables employers to weed out the problem employees who infect the workplace culture with negativity. Without social media, these employees are difficult to manage. We know who they are but it’s often quite difficult to prove the harm that their negativity is causing. But social media gives you the proof that you need.
Take, for example, the nurse at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. In response to a tweet by Gov. Barbour calling for suggestions about how to trim fiscal spending, the nurse tweeted back that the Governor should stop coming to the Center after hours for wellness visits, which resulted in overtime costs.
The Governor had visited the Center once after normal operating hours but that was before the nurse’s employment. In other words, she was just a negative employee who couldn’t help but make a nasty comment about which she had no personal knowledge.
Well, good for her. And good for the Center. The Center was able to terminate the nurse because her nasty tweet was a violation of HIPAA. Had it not been for her public comment via social media, the employer likely would not have had such indisputable proof of her nastiness. And, because her nastiness was unlawful, the Center had perfectly legitimate grounds to terminate her.
In other words, the cream rises to the top. The nasty employees who you do not want to keep employed almost can’t help themselves but to show their true colors via social media. And that’s a good thing because it enables employers to act sooner rather than later to eradicate these people from the workplace. Which non-nasty employees really appreciate.