The Perils of Social Networking Sites
Social networking sites are part of life for many young people
in the UK and throughout the world. But could they cause trouble in
the workplace? Chris Morvan spoke to Jersey advocate Helen Ruelle,
who has been researching the subject.
The huge increase in recent years in the use of social networking
sites - Facebook, Bebo and a host of others - has spread from the
home to the workplace - creating concerns for users and employers
alike. The potential implications in terms of privacy,
discrimination and other issues have led a Jersey lawyer to launch
a study of the subject. Helen Ruelle, senior associate with
Mourant, explained the reasons.
'It's something I've considered to discuss with some of our
clients in terms of "Have you thought about the broader
implications of social networking?" We try to be proactive
with our clients and if there's an issue that we think could be
important, we'll research it and maybe set up seminars and
workshops.'
For many employers, the first stage could be understanding exactly
what social networking sites are all about and what people do on
them. It is, after all, something that is widespread among younger
people, while those over, say, 30 are less likely to be
involved.
For those who have no understanding of the subject, this is how it
works: users write a 'profile' in which they include personal
details about themselves, and perhaps add some photographs and news
about what they are currently doing or have been doing. There are
restrictions designed to reserve certain information for contacts
who are invited to be 'friends', but Helen's research shows these
to be far from foolproof. 'People put information on these sites
and they think no one can see it unless they have given permission,
but that's not strictly true. People can get into it - and do. And
that's where it starts to be more problematic. It is even being
used as a recruitment tool. Some employers will do a Facebook
search to see what a potential employee might be up to. But there
are huge implications there, such as how do you know it's
true?'
The problem in that respect is that, just as we should all be wary
of accepting information found on the internet as correct, because
it could be either unintentionally or deliberately wrong, there is
the possibility that a profile may not have been created by the
real person at all. It could be a spoof, designed to cause mischief
or something more sinister.
'You could go and create "me" and say anything you wanted about
me,' Helen speculated. 'Or the profile you're looking at might be
that of a different person with the same name. Identity theft, as
we all know, is becoming increasingly common. So am I saying that,
as an employer, you should not use these sites? No. What I am
saying is that you should be extremely careful how you use that
information.'
So if an employer did look at somebody's Facebook profile, for
instance, and discover that he or she had, perhaps, had a
sex-change operation or had a particular - and irrelevant -
criminal conviction, any decision not to employ them on that basis
would be subject to the discrimination and other laws applicable in
that jurisdiction.
Above all, Helen urges caution.
'As a reputable employer, do you really want to rely on this,
rather than getting your own official verification? It is
potentially a useful tool but also potentially a nightmare.'
And it's not just the employer who needs to be careful. Social
networking site users talk about their life, which almost
inevitably involves discussing what they do at work. And that can
open them up to all sorts of charges from disgruntled employers.
Helen named three examples: 'Breach of confidentiality, breach of
restrictive covenants and even dilution of the brand. So there is a
tendency now,' she continued, 'for employers to be more controlling
about when and how people access these sites, and even what to do
when it's outside working hours. But most aren't going so far as to
ban their use at work completely. I think often there is a balance
to be struck. If people are working very long hours, and it's not a
nine-to-five job, for instance, employers tend to like to give
their employees some flexibility. You might want to have a break
and go onto Facebook at seven o'clock in the evening or during your
lunch hour, so there is a reluctance on the part of employers to
completely ban it. That said, there is a growing tendency for
employers to monitor internet use more, and I'd say that is quite a
recent thing. Some businesses are saying "Okay, here are the rules,
and if you can't play within them, we're going to ban it." But it's
far from universal. Of the firms that I deal with, I don't think
many of them ban it outright. They're more likely to say "The
internet is primarily a business tool. You can use it during your
lunch hour and before and after working hours." And they tend to
have generic rules about "excessive or inappropriate use". But in
my experience it is not the inappropriateness that's an issue, but
the amount of time. Most people are just booking flights, doing a
bit of online shopping, that sort of thing. Unfortunately, there
are some people who still think it appropriate to look at
unmentionable things on their work computer.' Internet monitoring
is actually quite a simple matter. As long as you've got the
contractual right to do it and you're in accordance with the
interception and other relevant laws, then off you go. The problem
with social networking sites is that it spreads beyond the work
environment. Companies are becoming more aware of these sites,
because the people who are spending excessive amounts of time on
the internet at work tend to be on those sites. Employers want to
know what they can do, how they can deal with it. And sometimes
it's not a response to a situation, but a question of how they can
draft their policies and procedures to make sure that if it does
happen, they can deal with it appropriately.'
Helen's advice to employees is to keep off such sites at work, and
when they use them in their own time they should restrict the
information they give out to purely personal matters and not
discuss work at all. 'They should not be discussing work
colleagues, and certainly not in a derogatory or discriminatory
way.'
On a similar note, there is the issue of someone being bullied by
a colleague on a social networking site outside working hours, in
the same way as one hears of children being hounded by text by
schoolmates.
Even removing the work element, Helen advises people to be
cautious. 'You should be very careful what details you put on the
site. If you don't want something becoming common knowledge, don't
put it on there. People can and do manipulate what they find on
there. There was a man in the UK recently who was awarded £22,000
in damages against a former friend for breach of privacy and libel.
As for employers, I think they should make it very clear what their
policy is regarding internet use in general and social networking
sites in particular. As an employer you are entitled to monitor,
but you have to have said you are doing it and why. You have to be
clear whether you are just monitoring the amount of time or if
you're monitoring which sites people are looking at. It's the same
with emails: are you monitoring traffic or content? There should be
no surprise to employees. And as a business you have to think "If
I'm monitoring email and website content, what am I doing with that
information?"'