Firing an Employee on the Basis of Having Inappropriate Comments on Social Network - Essay Example

DEBATE PAPER The labor market is often described as a robust because of the presence of strict labor laws that needs to be adhered to by all stakeholders involved. Most of these laws are globally accepted by international, national and sectional organizations including the United Nations, International Labor Organization, National Labor Commission, U.S Department of Labor among others. The idea behind the presence of these laws has been to ensure fairness in the day by day dealings between employers and employees (Encyclopedia of Labor Market, 2000). It would therefore be said that the major stakeholders that labor laws bind are employers and employees. Employers as used in this context refer to all people who are in a position to give employment to other people. They include both the public and private sectors. Employees are also people who work for other people in order to be paid a reward for the work they do. One interesting thing about labor laws is that it is no respecter of persons. In the first place, labor laws bind private employers as much as it binds private employers. The laws also bind employees in the public sector as much as it binds those in the private sector (Gardener, 2008). This is therefore to say that the laws are there to ensure a high level of equity. Secondly, there are laws that put restrictions on employers as much as there are laws that put restrictions on employees. This also outlines the fairness of the law. Above all, the laws are there as reference points in times of litigations and to ensure peace and harmony among employers and employees. It would indeed be ridiculous to assume a labor market without any labor laws. Without any doubt, one area that most labor laws are highly emphatic about is the area of hiring and firing. In the United States, there are specific procedures that employers are expected to follow when hiring employees. The Internal Revenue Service (2011) for instance posits that employers must verify that each new employee is legally eligible to work in the United States and that all employees who are hired fill out Form I-9 of Employment Eligibility Verification. In the same way, there are laws on how to fire or dismiss an employee. Touching on the theme of dismissing or firing an employee on the basis of having inappropriate comments on social network such as Facebook and Twitter, there are several areas of the law that can be scrutinized to point to why it would be inappropriate and out of order to fire employees because of such behavior. Before outling specific points and reasons why the writer holds the view that employers cannot fire employees on the basis that they have posted inappropriate comments on social networks like Twitter and Facebook, it would also be important to point out that quite apart from the labor laws, there are ethical and organizational cultural issues that influences reasons why employees cannot be fired for the offense under discussion. Before proceeding to the major points for taking the stand that employers are not allowed to fire employees for posting inappropriate comments on social networks such as Facebook and Twitter, it is very important to ask a number of sensitive and labor related questions. First, it is very important to ask and to find out whether the act of making or posting the inappropriate comments was done within the working hours of the company. The International Labor Organization (2007) explains that the stipulated working hours for employees may range from not less than 32 hours to 40 hours a week. Within this working hours when the employee is under the direct watch of the employer, it employer is assumed to be under the total control of the employers. This invariably means that periods outside the working hours constitutes the private times of the employees and so actions they take within those times can hardly be subject to regulations in place at the workplace. The debate therefore has a lot to offer should the question be distinguished as to whether or not the act was committed outside working hours. Should the act be taken outside working hours, then out rightly it would be said that that is the private life of the employee and so that should not have anything to do with the employers. The debater is therefore going to build points based on the assumption that the act was even committed during working hours. The next important question to ask has to do with whether or not the act of posting the inappropriate comments was done on behalf of the company or it was done as part of the personal activity of the employee. It would be noted that the presence of social networks have come as a great advantage to businesses and organizations. These organizations and businesses are using the presence of social networks to establish what has come to be known as corporate social networks. These are ways by which organizations and businesses interact with their customers and other prospective customers on their needs and expectations from the company. Through these corporate social networks, companies bring themselves closer to their clients and customers and establish better inter-personal relationships with them. For this reason, most companies often ask employees to take up the task of socializing with clients through the use of social networks. Again, if the act was committed on the private browsing section of the employee, then it would be said that that is strictly personal and so the employer has not business being concerned about that (Mustapha, 2008). The writer is however going to debate on the assumption that the employee was working on behalf of the company and faulted. Whether any given employee posted inappropriate comments on social network during working hours or on behalf of the company, the employer is not allowed to fire such an employee because firing the employee would be tantamount to the discouragement of personal expressions, the promotion of the use of social network as a corporate social competitive advantage and all other forms of freedom of expression in the company or organization. Clearly, it is not being advocated employees should be careless about their choice of words but it is also important to think about the repercussions that subsequent employees who would take over from dismissed employees would face. Clearly, these subsequent employees are going to work under a lot of fear of making mistakes and are also going to work in the absence of any innovation and initiation due to the fear of making mistakes and being fired. According to the World Business Academy, it is only when employees are given much room to be themselves, make mistakes and learn from their mistakes that they can become eventual masters with innovation and strategic decision making. What this point echoes is that the act of making mistakes is not always a bad thing but a way of learning from one’s past, learning what not to do the next time round, and taking up the challenge to be a better person. Instead of firing such an erring employee therefore, natural processes should be allowed to take its personal course whereby the employee should be confronted by victims. This way, the culprit would naturally learn to be a better person in future endeavors. Another sensitive point to consider for not firing an employee who posts inappropriate comments on social network has to do with the cost of dealing with vacancies and recurring employee turnover as a result. It is very important to note that firing an employment does not only have legal implications but also comes with a lot of economic effects on the company that may be undertaking the firing or dismissal. According to the United States Department of Labor (2012) for instance, once an employer fires an employee, there are thousands of dollars that must be paid to the employee who losses his or her job such as jobless and healthcare benefits and unemployment benefits. All these are amounts that could be channeled into developing and expanding the company. Even more, the company would have to go through a lot of financial expenses in getting a new employee in place: not to talk of the restructuring that would have to take place in the organization amidst the suspension of existing organizational culture to make room for the new employee to adjust. Considering all these points, it would just not be right for an employer to fire an employee on an issue such as the postage of inappropriate comments on a social network platform. One last point that is used debate the need not for employers to fire employees on the grounds that employees have posted inappropriate comments on social networks has to do with the institutionalization of alternative disciplinary measures. It is important that organizations, businesses and corporate bodies have alternative disciplinary measures to cater for cases such as this instead deciding on firing or dismissal. Most of these alternative disciplinary measures could be internal punishments to be suffered by offenders. Clearly, measures like deduction of earnings or forfeiting benefits for a while would go a long way to save the company all the costs that my be associated with firing. It would also help in the deepening of democratic practice in the workplace. This is because employees would appreciate the attempts of management to handle issues internally as an effort to respect employees and make room to accommodate their weaknesses. This in itself may be a major motivation for urging employees to continue staying committed to the affairs of the company and putting in their best to live up to the chances that the working environment creates for them to get reformed. Having made all the points above, it would be acknowledged that employees should be people who should live above reproach. They should try as much as possible to protect the image and corporate branding of their institutions. Without any doubt, an employee who posts inappropriate comments on social networks undermines the image of his or her organization and gives the organization very negative external image. When such acts continue, there is the tendency that such gross acts of indiscipline may be tagged as part of the organizational culture of the company in question. For this reason, eliminating by firing the root of the organization’s downfall may be very prudent as the saying goes that one is not a fool if he gives up what he cannot keep for what he cannot loss. This not withstanding, I continue to hold a firm point that there should always be room for correcting one’s wrong where the wrong was created. Therefore, employers should not fire employees who post wrong and inappropriate comments on social networks such as Facebook and Twitter but rather give them the opportunity to reform within the very organizations in which they erred. Works Cited “Hiring Employees.” Internal Revenue Service. 2011. http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98164,00.html Web. 13 April. 2012. “International Labor Organisation.” Macedonia Labour Relations Act, dated 27 December 1993. NATLEX. 2007. http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/WEBTEXT/47727/65084/E93MKD02.htm#c10. Web. 13 April 2012 “Labor Laws and Clarifications.” Encyclopedia of Labor Market. Hoboken: Wiley, 2000. ebrary Reference. 12 June. 2010. Web. 13 Apr. 2011. “Termination.” United States Department of Labor. 2012. http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/termination/index.htm Web. 13 April 2012. “The Wisdom of two generals.” World Business Academy. 2001. http://publications.worldbusiness.org/pdfs/global-reconstruction/2001/the_wisdom_of_two_generals2.pdf Web. 13 April 2012 Gardener, James. “Global Labor Relationships.” The International Laws on Labor (2008). Ebrary Reference. Web. 13 Apr. 2012. Mustapha, Amid. “Corporate Social Responsibilities."Washington Writers League 29 Oct. 2008. Academic OneFile. Web. 13 Apr. 2012. Read More