Chester 01244 405555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Airport City, Manchester 0844 800 8346

Office 129
Manchester Business Park
3000 Aviator Way
Manchester M22 5TG

Send us a message
Our Offices

Social Media

4th November, 2011

Whether through tweeting, blogging or other means – 22.7% of time online is spent on social networking (UKOM). That’s more than three times the second most time consuming online activity which is e-mailing at only 7.2% (UKOM). If so much time is spent on social networking it is inevitable that cases in Employment law involving social media activities will increase dramatically in the next few months.

One difficult question in this area is: where does an individual’s obligation to his employer end and his private life begin? In Pay v United Kingdom [2009] IRLR 139, an employee was dismissed after photographs of him participating in sado-masochistic activities were posted on the internet. In this particular case, given the nature of his role as a probation officer dealing with sexual offenders, interference to his private life under the European Convention on Human Rights was held to be proportionate by the European Court of Human Rights.

In Whitham v Club 24 Ltd t/a Ventura ET/1810462/10 an employee who posted comments suggesting that her colleagues were immature was unfairly dismissed since the comments were relatively mild and there were no specific references to any clients. Nor was there evidence of any actual or likely harm to the relationship between the Respondent and a client, Volkswagen.

In Preece v JD Wetherspoons plc ET2104806110 an employee was held to have been fairly dismissed after she made comments on her Facebook account whilst at work about customers who had been abusive to her and another employee. Miss Preece’s contract included a term that Wetherspoons could immediately terminate her contract if she was found guilty of gross misconduct. Examples of gross misconduct included failure to comply with the e-mail, internet and intranet policy.

There are relatively few reported cases on the topic of social media as of yet and few potential issues have been considered by the appeal courts. Until further guidance is available, employers should consider implementing a policy to deal with social media. The policy should cover the following:
– scope of the policy i.e. what is permitted and what is restricted;
– reserve the right to monitor and review IT resources;
– personal use of social media;
– reference to bullying, disciplinary, data protection and other related policies;
– consequences of breaching the policy.

For a social media policy or any other general queries, please contact Helen Watson on 01244 405555 or email [email protected].

You might also be interested in...

Villiers v Villiers (2018) EWCA Civ 1120

3rd July, 2020

Brief Background Mr & Mrs Villier married in 1995, and lived in Scotland together until separation in 2012. Once separated, the wife moved to England, but the husband remained living in Scotland. In July 2013 the wife issued a divorce petition in England, but in October 2014 the husband lodged a writ for divorce in Scotland. As the... Read More »

Why claiming inheritance tax relief is not simply horseplay

1st July, 2020

Agricultural property relief from Inheritance Tax has long been a valuable relief for estates, which when available can... Read More »

Governments Calls For Responsible Contractual Behaviour – What Does This Mean For You?

29th June, 2020

In May 2020 the UK Government released additional guidance in connection with the Covid-19 pandemic, this time in... Read More »

Contact Us
Secured By miniOrange