Last Friday I gave a presentation to users of the City Business Library at the Guildhall in London. The topic was the use of social media in the workplace and the issues it raises for employers. You can view the presentation by clicking here.
There was a useful discussion afterwards and most people had stories to tell of how people at work had misused email, inadvertently or otherwise. Social media, of course, goes beyond just email and surfing the internet. Indeed, controlling use of these two is probably the easiest of the challenges facing employers. IT departments can deny access to dodgy websites and it is easy to tell employees what should and should not be said from the corporate email account (although having said that it is still amazing how many people ignore this).
It’s getting a bit scary. Recently I wrote about how I predicted that Gordon Turner’s serial-litigants.com search website for tracking down abusers of the ET system would be challenged (and it was, in Parliament). Then I wrote a piece about the need for employers to develop social media policies for use by their staff – and last weekend Vodafone hit the news when one of their employees misused the corporate Twitter account to write homophobic and sexist comments. Then Manchester United and Manchester City denied having banned their players from using social media. Finally the BBC tonight reports on a “cyberspace witch hunt” at the world’s formerly favourite airline, BA. 15 cabin crew members are reported to have been suspended for posting inappropriate comments on the Unite website. Unite retorts that the comments were on its Facebook page (so what?) and accused BA of “intimidation”. Clearly this blog is a happening place.
Everyone is talking about social media these days and no longer is it confined to the purely social. Many businesses are using it to promote themselves; good heavens, even lawyers are getting into it. But use of sites like Facebook, My Space, You Tube and micro-blogging sites like Twitter present multiple challenges to employers.
Comments (3) 
