Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Racism: A recent story brings up a good question: [View all]ancianita
(41,164 posts)48. Here are the boundaries for firing.
If you are an actual employee of Facebook, you can be fired. It creates a hostile work place and product.
If you work for a company that by policy allows Facebook in the workplace, you can be fired for the same reason.
If you work for a company that doesn't allow social media at all in the workplace, then your prejudicial rants are on your own time UNLESS
1. you ACT on those words, the company can fire you, since your public behavior negatively reflects on the company; and
2. you indirectly hurt someone in the company by publishing rants about that person on Facebook; that hurts the company, too, which the prejudiced poster should be fired for.
If you work for a company that doesn't allow social media at all in the workplace, and you post about no one in your company but about others in general, or about current events that you use as a platform for venting your prejudicial rants, then no, the company cannot fire you unless they have explicit employee ethics terms of employment about prejudicial statements toward people of color, terms which you signed on to. Then they'd have to prove that YOU actually posted the rant, by accessing your computer address and passwords; and that what you posted broke company ethics policy. It would be a costly slog but a company can do this. But not by simple hearsay reports from some anonymous source.
If you are verifiably a member of a hate group, this would likely violate any company's general ethics code; thus, the employee could be fired, given incontrovertible proof.
Character is everything. In the workplace, reputation is everything. People can be stupid, evil, etc. and still have some constitutional rights that give them space and time to change.
People can be victims of identity theft. They can be ethical professionals who have their lives ruined by a hacker who poses as them and goes on a racist rant -- for whatever the motive -- and then, what legal recourse does that person have to preserve his/her good reputation?
Because this kind of behavior is in the realm of the possible doesn't make it probable. Prejudice online can only be proven as a pattern of posting. One-offs, bad days, or a negative encounter might bring out the ignorant need to scapegoat or blame or flame, but a one-off never defines one as prejudiced, nevermind racist. People can have bad experiences with any race and therefore form negative stereotypes; people can have good experiences or no experiences with any race and just go with the flow of their family and social context. Are WE to interfere with their ability to make a living?
If I were the average employer or employee, I certainly wouldn't spend my time outing people to bosses just because there is prejudiced speech floating around. If people have time to call out others character flaws, my first thought is that they're not doing the job I hired them for, and they themselves are assholes for wasting my time and money. They can be assholes on their personal time, but I wouldn't as a boss, care to get embroiled in character policing in my business, except that it affects morale, process and profit. But firing an employee on hearsay without my having proof wouldn't happen.
If you work for a company that by policy allows Facebook in the workplace, you can be fired for the same reason.
If you work for a company that doesn't allow social media at all in the workplace, then your prejudicial rants are on your own time UNLESS
1. you ACT on those words, the company can fire you, since your public behavior negatively reflects on the company; and
2. you indirectly hurt someone in the company by publishing rants about that person on Facebook; that hurts the company, too, which the prejudiced poster should be fired for.
If you work for a company that doesn't allow social media at all in the workplace, and you post about no one in your company but about others in general, or about current events that you use as a platform for venting your prejudicial rants, then no, the company cannot fire you unless they have explicit employee ethics terms of employment about prejudicial statements toward people of color, terms which you signed on to. Then they'd have to prove that YOU actually posted the rant, by accessing your computer address and passwords; and that what you posted broke company ethics policy. It would be a costly slog but a company can do this. But not by simple hearsay reports from some anonymous source.
If you are verifiably a member of a hate group, this would likely violate any company's general ethics code; thus, the employee could be fired, given incontrovertible proof.
Character is everything. In the workplace, reputation is everything. People can be stupid, evil, etc. and still have some constitutional rights that give them space and time to change.
People can be victims of identity theft. They can be ethical professionals who have their lives ruined by a hacker who poses as them and goes on a racist rant -- for whatever the motive -- and then, what legal recourse does that person have to preserve his/her good reputation?
Because this kind of behavior is in the realm of the possible doesn't make it probable. Prejudice online can only be proven as a pattern of posting. One-offs, bad days, or a negative encounter might bring out the ignorant need to scapegoat or blame or flame, but a one-off never defines one as prejudiced, nevermind racist. People can have bad experiences with any race and therefore form negative stereotypes; people can have good experiences or no experiences with any race and just go with the flow of their family and social context. Are WE to interfere with their ability to make a living?
If I were the average employer or employee, I certainly wouldn't spend my time outing people to bosses just because there is prejudiced speech floating around. If people have time to call out others character flaws, my first thought is that they're not doing the job I hired them for, and they themselves are assholes for wasting my time and money. They can be assholes on their personal time, but I wouldn't as a boss, care to get embroiled in character policing in my business, except that it affects morale, process and profit. But firing an employee on hearsay without my having proof wouldn't happen.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
106 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

I wonder if white people and Black people would answer this question differently
randys1
Oct 2015
#54
how is abhorring racism in any way "buying into propaganda"? do you really think that is a value
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#25
No, not that particular value judgement. I'd wager it's self-evident enough to...
Shandris
Oct 2015
#27
I hate to break it to you- but "the mob" has been at it forever- and their victims were largely POC
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#31
YOU SAID this was a new phenomenon "unleashed", so was just explaining how wrong you are.
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#43
I don't need to look a few years back to know you're mistaken now. But thanks!
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#93
We didn't ruin their life. They were stupid and very cruel in a very public way. It's on them.
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#32
Right, it's about personal responsibility. A company has the right to employ whom they choose.If
underahedgerow
Oct 2015
#95
"Other": I might report it if it were MY employer too and I felt it impacted the company.
Hortensis
Oct 2015
#15
"will fire up the mob" and "burn the witch" ? Funny! Because there already IS a war on women
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#26
Having read the situation in question, that dude DEFINITELY deserved to be fired.
Warren DeMontague
Oct 2015
#22
Agreed. He was ridiculing a coworker's child. Invited racist spew to be directed at this child.
salin
Oct 2015
#28
oh look down thread- someone seems to think this thread is about income equality......
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#89
I'm wondering if the hypotheticals I'm imagining are the same as the ones others imagine.
Brickbat
Oct 2015
#97
Unfortunately, I am finding it less puzzling and more disappointing of those ...
1StrongBlackMan
Oct 2015
#78
"which is just talk,really" . you want to protect those who racially insult coworkers? and minimize
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#33
He stepped over a whole bunch of lines, starting with posting a picture of someone else's kid w/o
Warren DeMontague
Oct 2015
#34
and his waitress friend- referring to the kid as "a slave", does not deserve to work with the public
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#38
No, I think that if someone reveals a hateful ideology, you can fairly assume it taints their
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#49
Yep. But I don't know a thing about "the story." I'm talking generalities here. In good faith.
ancianita
Oct 2015
#63
The OP wrote about racism on Facebook. The talk standard doesn't apply in the workplace, obviously.
ancianita
Oct 2015
#35
so, you'd keep an employee who was marching with the KKK because that was on his time off?
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#41
So prejudice speech "floating around" in the workplace is no big deal- for you. Love the
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#51
The OP doesn't get to be vague on details and then everyone argue what he means. I'm answering
ancianita
Oct 2015
#56
I'm happy to judge the character of people who spew bigotry @ work, and get, you're more forgiving....
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#58
Have at it. I ain't got time for cheap attacks on some wording in my effort-posts.
ancianita
Oct 2015
#62
I was obviously responding to your thoughts. I have been in the actual position of having an
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#65
I told you. I don't know "the story." I don't make light of workplace hostility. Ever. If you think
ancianita
Oct 2015
#69
Ah, using MLK to try and persuade people to back burner their racial concerns, thank you....
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#71
There really ARE a lot of ways to solve problems of racism, and they don't all involve niggling
ancianita
Oct 2015
#74
" adults trying to reach the goal of structural fairness"- what a patronizing bit of tripe.
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#87
Look above for an interesting rationalization for looking the other way.....
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#90
I saw that earlier & understand this: If I ever ran into any of those people.......
WillowTree
Oct 2015
#36