Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Need an argumentative essay on OPINION LETTER. Needs to be 3 pages. Please no plagiarism.Employers respond to the employees postings on Facebook with the threat of work termination but they have to ev
Need an argumentative essay on OPINION LETTER. Needs to be 3 pages. Please no plagiarism.
Employers respond to the employees postings on Facebook with the threat of work termination but they have to evaluate whether they are breaking the law or not by firing a worker because of the utilization of social media. In response, worker who have been fired because of the use of social media have filed complaints with the NLRB arguing that they have been relieved of their jobs due to the utilization of social media especially Facebook. Other workers argue that the organizations have put in place policies that aim to frustrate their personal freedom of expression.
The report from NLRB reveals that majority of Facebook users do not consider possible outcomes before they make any inflammatory posting on the site and their remarks about a certain attract much attention than they had expected. Employers on their part are firing workers who post inflammatory statements on Facebook on grounds that they are tarnishing the firm’s name with their irrational remarks or in simple manner, acting unprofessionally on social media sites. However, what they fail to understand is that employees or workers ramblings might be guarded by labor policies. A good case study about Facebook firings is the case concerning the medical technician. Souza Dawnmarie remarked on Facebook in 2010 how she liked how the firm permits a 17 to become a manager. In this case, she was referring to her employer at the head office in Hartford. The company (AMR) though the use of number 17 meant psychiatric patients. The case was in December 2009. The case was Souza v AMR firm.
Despite the fact that Souza commented from the confines of her individual computer during after work hours, she was later fired for allegedly making inflammatory remarks about the company’s boss. She filed the case to NLRB and in February 2011, informed AMR firm that its laws hindering workers from making negative remarks on social
