fire the blogger

[RabBell]

read this and recoil in horror

http://www.theregister.com/2005/01/11/waterstones_blog/

what do you think on this, I know we got some bloggers on Kirupa, is this acceptable :h:

[Pomme_]

Wrote Gordon: "I am not a serf; I am not an indentured servant. I am a free man with the right of freedom of expression. The company does not own me, body and soul - conforming to their rules at work is to be expected, but in your own time and space? How can anyone be expected to go through their personal life in fear of saying the wrong thing? No-one should.

I don't think there's anything more to add...

[RabBell]

I don't think there's anything more to add...
hhmmm there's a thread killing line

I actuallly think "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" has some relevance in this. I have sympathy for the guy but to be honest I kinda see Waterstones side as well.

[senocular]

This has happened before and the company has the right to fire you if you are, even if on a personal level, representing ideals that conflict with that of the company's. For example, Regis can't be going out in his free time and talking about how much he loves child p0rn and still expect to stay on the air professionally (not to imply that he enjoys such things)

[bwh2]

the font size in that guy's blog is ridiculous. i'd can him just for that.

[Pomme_]

who's Regis?

and, as you know how I hate businesses, I'm always on the slanted side of the employee anyhow... :p

childpOrn is illegal, whether professionally or on your free time, so the example is meeeeeeeeeeeeh.

So what about MacDiddy's employees? They don't have the right to go to BurgerKing or say to their friends that MacDiddy's food is not as tasty as In'n'Out?

[lostinbeta]

Yeah Sen, I must agree, that example is pretty poor since that is illegal no matter what.

Now I could see him being fired for talking about future shows and plans the network has in store for him in his personal time.

However, I can't see someone getting fired for venting in a blog about a bad day at work. So what, everyone has them. I am sure there is not one person that hasn't had a bad day that they just want to ***** about then be over it. It's ridiculous.

I remember a while back reading stories about the guy who got fired from microsoft because he took pictures of a shipment of macs in the loading dock and posted them in his blog because he found it ironic. Though Microsoft claimed that they fired him because the photo posed security risks as it was an inside view looking to the outside so you got a view of the loading dock and the outside surroundings. I find that to be bull****, but whatever, it stands to be argued and can be a good enough reason to fire someone I suppose. Ranting in a blog about a sucky day at work here and there is no risk to the company, unless he is exposing crucial information no one outside the company is supposed to know. So why fire him?

[senocular]

most people like this are under contract that restricts their personal dealings. I don't know if it mentioned if this guy was or not, but its not uncommon.

[lostinbeta]

'most people like this'?

You mean most people that work for booksellers are required by contact not to talk about their job outside of work?

Well that's just ridiculous right there...lol.

[smoothhabitat]

The problem is that business (our current popular model of business, at least) is only interested in profit. That's what capitalism is all about (and it would work better if the government would stick up to it). I mean, Jefferson warned of the dangers of "moneyed encorporations". Actually, the people were very wary of original corporations. They were created for large public works projects, like building bridges, BUT were required to disband as soon as the project was over. They were very limited in power (and this was on purpose), like they couldn't buy other corporations and if they stepped over the line anywhere they would be immediately dissolved.

ANYWAY, my point is. This is business. And we can't talk all we want about the small issues, but it's really a larger systemic issue. Unless the business model is turned upside-down, so that it is RUN by the employees with some sense of community involved, there will always be bosses (highly ideological, paranoid, and corrupted by the systemic problems) who do not care about employees.

Also, on a completely legal standpoint, I doubt a bookstore dude ever signed a non-disclosure agreement. Everyone has the right to ***** about their job. You need to vent. It's okay. Hell, if I was a boss at a bookstore (and see above paragraph about why I wouldn't be), I'd be worried if my employees DIDN'T ***** about their job a little bit.... I worked at a great bookstore for a while, and that's what people did. We're talking underpaid and relatively high-stress (believe it or not).

[smoothhabitat]

the above ***** is b17ch for those of you who couldn't figure out the stars.

[GreenLantern]

This is very interesting, and something I think we are going to be dealing with more and more as our personal privacy becomes less and less

[billystar]

the internet is the public domain... what he did is the same as standing on a soap box on his local high street shouting about his life at waterstones

while he may draw the whole freedom of speech argument into this, i dont think it really has anything to do with it. it stands to reason that you do not criticise your employers in any public forum and expect zero consequences. whehter he should have been sacked or disciplined is the real issue here.

what he did was not right IMO

[Pomme_]

Would you tell us why it wasn't right?

[bwh2]

...he does occasionally mention his time at Waterstone's. As he puts it: "Like many folk I am not always happy at work...and coin terms such as 'Bastardstone's' and have a character called 'Evil Boss'...obviously not the professional image the company's seeking

[SlowRoasted]

Id fire an ungrateful employee in a second. come on now, there are plenty of people that would do a better job out there and be a lot more possitive about it. Company loyalty is also very important, and "venting" about a boss or company is not showing that loyalty. Making a company or boss look bad is not showing loyalty, and is downright just not smart. If i were interviewing someone and they mentioned that they might talk bad about me as a boss behind my back or on the internet there is no way in the world i would hire him, I dont care how good they are. Thats just not the type of person I would want working for me.

[Pomme_]

1) NO ONE in their right mind would say "btw, I'm gonna ***** about you as soon as I get the job".
2) venting about your boss is NORMAL. Would you fire an employee if he were talking to his wife about how bad his job was and you overheard it?The question is: is venting about it in front of a crowd possibly exceeding the billion normal? (not that there are as many readers on his blog, but let's say the whole of Internet reads his blog). Freedom of speech is essential, the question is: where does your freedom stop?
3) do you show loyalty to someone who doesn't give you back any respect (ie: low wages when the boss is making huge bucks)
4) how do you know there are people doing a better job? *****ing about your boss doesn't prevent you from doing a fine job. It's not because you don't ***** that you're doing the best job out there. I ***** about my boss (and in front of him sometimes). So what?
5) I don't think he's ungrateful about anyone, he's saying what's on his mind. Sometimes, I'm angry with my mum, I'm still grateful that my mother bore me into this ****ed up world (couldn't find a better exemple ATM)

[SlowRoasted]

there is a big difference between talking bad about your boss to your wife and publishing it on the internet for the whole world to see. Yeah I would expect someone to talk bad about me as a boss from time to time, but not deface me on the internet. So I agree he may not be ungrateful, but i do think that he is rather stupid and deserves to get fired for what he did.

Even if there are other better employees out there, I would be willing to sacrifice a little quality to get a possitive, more professional, employee.

[bwh2]

imagine somebody typing your company's name into google and having a pissed off employee's blog be one of the first things to come up.

[SlowRoasted]

thats a good example

[billystar]

imagine somebody typing your company's name into google and having a pissed off employee's blog be one of the first things to come up.
BINGO

come back to that

[Pomme_]

only, in this particular case, he does not mention the company's name, but a derivative of it. Hence, if you look into Google, you won't find the blog.

Came back to it.

[bwh2]

...he does occasionally mention his time at Waterstone's.even though the google example is more theoretical, i still think it's relevant.

[smoothhabitat]

Id fire an ungrateful employee in a second. come on now, there are plenty of people that would do a better job out there and be a lot more possitive about it.

Which brings me back to my point about how an employee-run business has a sense of ownership and community. Corporations have struggled over the years to make the workforce as expendable as possible, dumbing down their work and turning "training" into 20 minute videos.



Making a company or boss look bad is not showing loyalty, and is downright just not smart.

I question whether the boss really has the right to be the boss. Often the boss pretty much deserves what the employee is venting about-- because the employee usually knows more about how to run his/her own job than the boss and should be the one making the rules.

[bwh2]

I question whether the boss really has the right to be the boss.they have the right to be the boss if the person writing the paychecks says so. it's the beauty of voluntary employment - if you don't like it, leave.

[smoothhabitat]

voluntary employment

being employed is not voluntary when the other option is starving.