New Jersey Law Journal Home
  • Home
  • Advertise
  • Find a Job
  • Books
  • CLE
  • Daily Decision Service
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Smart Litigator

Home › NLRB Report on Social Media Highlights Overbroad Employer Restrictions

Font Size: increase font decrease font

NLRB Report on Social Media Highlights Overbroad Employer Restrictions

By Jenna Greene All Articles 

Legal Times

May 30, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

The National Labor Relations Board on May 30 issued a new report on social media policies for employees, giving real-world examples of company restrictions that cross the line, as well as highlighting instances where rules are valid.

"I hope that this report, with its specific examples of various employer policies and rules, will provide additional guidance in this area," said NLRB acting general counsel Lafe Solomon in a news release.

The key question in evaluating social media policies, according to the report, is whether restrictions “would reasonably be construed to chill the exercise of Section 7 rights” by employees under the National Labor Relations Act.

For example, the NLRB found that one policy barring workers from disclosing “confidential guest, team member or company information” on social networking sites like Facebook or You Tube was unlawful. The reason: It could “reasonably be interpreted as prohibiting employees from discussing and disclosing information regarding their own conditions of employment, as well as the conditions of employment of employees other than themselves—activities that are clearly protected by Section 7.”

Another no-no: instructing employees to be sure that their posts are “completely accurate and not misleading and that they do not reveal non-public information on any public site.” According to the NLRB, “the term ‘completely accurate and not misleading’ is overbroad because it would reasonably be interpreted to apply to discussions about, or criticism of, the Employer’s labor policies and its treatment of employees.”

The NLRB also said it was unlawful to tell employees not to post “offensive, demeaning, abusive or inappropriate remarks” because that covers “a broad spectrum of communications that would include protected criticisms of the Employer’s labor policies or treatment of employees.”

As for cautioning employees to “think carefully” about friending colleagues, that too was unlawfully overbroad, according to the NLRB, because it would discourage communication among co-workers.

Not even an admonishment against commenting on legal matters passed NLRB muster. “We found that the prohibition on employees’ commenting on any legal matters is unlawful because it specifically restricts employees from discussing the protected subject of potential claims against the Employer,” according to the NLRB.

So what are employers allowed to do? The report included an example of an acceptable policy, which included warnings such as “you are solely responsible for what you post online,” and “Before creating online content, consider some of the risks and rewards that are involved. Keep in mind that any of your conduct that adversely affects your job performance,…may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination.”

Former NLRB general counsel Ronald Meisburg, now a partner at Proskauer Rose, found this section to be “of greatest interest,” he said via e-mail. “This goes beyond the usual guidance given by the General Counsel and should be of special interest to employers.



Subscribe to Legal Times

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Middlesex Judge Suspended After Arrest for Harboring a Fugitive
    •      
  2. Lawyer Suspended Two Years for Gaming Bankruptcy Court Process
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  3. Lawyer Vanishes, Leaving Firm With Detritus of Suit vs. Ford
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  4. Court Sets Down Procedure for Discovery in Child Porn Cases
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  5. Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
    •         
      • Subscription Required
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of Forms Draws N.J. High Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Ties to Senecas Cannot Shield Golf Course Developer, Panel Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Decision Costs Prevailing Attorneys $200,000 Fee Award
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corbett Signs Bill to Eliminate Traffic Court

Christian College Granted Injunction In Obamacare Suit
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

About njlj.com   |   Contact njlj.com   |   Advertise with Us   |   Site Map
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media