It would seem that Waitrose managers understand neither the concept of freedom of speech, nor the extent to which a contract of employment binds an individual.
Managers have launched an investigation after they found descriptions of customers as “pikey skanks” on social networking website Facebook.
Dozens of staff contributed to the discussion forum on the page called Waitrose Isn’t a Supermarket, It’s a State of Mind, where staff were asked to list what annoys them most.
Well, if you ask the question, you really shouldn’t get all arsey when someone replies with a response that you don’t like.
Ultimately, though, it is none of the managers’ business what people say and do outside of work hours – although increasingly employers seem to think it is. The only time that it does, is if it directly impacts on work – drinking in the evening and turning up for work hung-over, for example. In my line of work, you don’t even have to be hung-over to be in breach of the law. That, however, is in the contract of employment.
Equally, anyone working in the rail industry is bound by a confidentiality agreement. It used to be in the old BR rule book that we were not allowed to speak to the press. This was a reasonable precaution. What it did not say was that we were not allowed to express our opinions over a pint at the local – which is what Facebook and Internet fora are, essentially.
Supermarket workers face the public day in and day out. They have my sympathy. If they let off a bit of steam about their bad experiences, this is a good thing. It saves them bottling it up and giving one of those customers both barrels (which would impact on work). It’s a safety valve and if Waitrose’s management had even half a grain of common sense, they would let it pass without comment. Oh, but no, this is the age of the RighteousTM and we mustn’t speak our minds for fear of causing offence – a heinous crime much worse than murder or rape.
A spokesman for Waitrose said: “This is completely unacceptable behaviour.”
“It goes against our codes of conduct which make it very clear that partners who post this type of material are in breach of their terms of employment.”
I’d love to see those terms of employment – do they also forbid chatting to your mates over a drink?
Let’s be clear here – what people say outside of work is none of the managers’ business. They have no right whatsoever to engage in an investigation. These people are merely expressing an opinion. That is their right in a free liberal society that values freedom of speech.
Er, I think there may be a flaw in that last statement…
H/T Thylacosmilus.
I’m in two minds over this one. Whilst I agree with you about the principle when I was running my own company I would have been very annoyed if one of my employees started slagging of my customers in a public forum on the internet, whether it was in their own time or not.
But then again, I would like to think I employed people who had the common sense not to be so stupid.
I take your point – I would be annoyed, too. But, ultimately, the principle is greater. Employers do not own their staff. Perhaps your last sentence says it all 😉
Democracy is fine, as long as it is part of a system that separations state powers and is thus bound hand and foot. If it is not, it is just another form of enabling tyranny, a majoritarian tyranny.
Politics is an intrinsicly vile activity and democracy is just a form of politics.
It’s worse than that at the moment… We have a minority tyranny. BTW, I assume you intended this to go in the post about Paulie’s piece of arse dribble?