social media | Andrea Dooley Arbitration

The other day, a party representative commented on this website, saying that she appreciated the availability calendar because it had simplified the process of scheduling our hearing. Other arbitrators, I’ve learned, don’t maintain their own website, and quite a few are leery of having an internet presence at all. In a gathering of arbitrators and would-be arbitrators, I found that very few people had even done an internet search of their name to learn that the parties might find out about them while doing internet research.

I’ve written before about the ethics of social media for neutrals, and you can read that article here, if you like. I also thought it would be helpful to let parties know my personal policy on social media, where I do maintain accounts on the most common social media sites. Here’s my personal policy for each of my social media accounts:

Facebook: I accept requests from or maintain Facebook connections to people I personally socialize with or have been employed with or volunteered with in the past. I don’t accept friend requests from unions, employers or their representatives, staff or members. I maintain a separate Facebook page for my arbitration practice that is publicly available to view.

LinkedIn: I accept all requests from people in the United States and Canada who are likely to have some nexus to my profession, such as HR and union professionals who I have not worked with but who may be looking for my current resume. I don’t have personal connections to very many of the people I am connected to on LinkedIn, and my connection to someone should not be taken as evidence of any personal connection or even knowledge of that person.

Instagram and Twitter: I follow very few people outside of my immediate family and friend groups (Instagram) or journalists, comedians and politicians (Twitter), but haven’t had an occasion to block any followers. Don’t bother following me there; it’s mostly pictures of my dog and my garden, or posts about my non-work writing and reposts of news articles I found interesting. Retweets are not endorsements.

I recognize that this is somewhat unorthodox and welcome feedback about it. Please submit any questions and comments you have. Thanks!

Last year, I was asked to present on the “new electronic frontiers” in the workplace, and related issues in arbitration. In preparing my presentation, I came across these incredible statistics from the Pew Research Center:

As of November 2016,

88% of American adults have internet access
69% of American adults use social media
86% of 18-29 year olds use social media
80% of 30-49 year olds use social media
64% of 50-64 year olds use social media
68% of American adults use Facebook
88% of 18-29 year olds use Facebook
65% of adults who make less than $30000/year use Facebook
76% of Facebook users use it daily
Facebook at 191 active monthly users in the United States, and 1.86 billion active monthly users worldwide

These numbers are stunning for a few reasons. First of all, it’s clear that internet and social media usage are as or more pervasive among workers than possibly any other media usage or activity. Other than essentials like eating and sleeping, is there anything this many Americans do in common? Second, this kind of access undermines arguments that workers cannot and do not use technology in a variety ways. It’s clear that the internet isn’t going away, and workers are relying on it more than ever for everything from socializing to banking to managing their own work.

As a result, employers and unions are grappling with the issues that are raised by access to social media and the internet, both in and out of the workplace. Other the next several posts, I want to talk about the variety of these cases and how arbitrators approach them.

The most common issue that arbitrators see in this area are disciplinary matters that hinge on misuse of equipment, the internet, social media and on-duty vs. off-duty conduct. In general, arbitrators apply a variation of the Just Cause Standard to these cases, asking:

Is there a clear policy on internet, social media, computer or email usage?
Is the rule articulated reasonable?
How was the information obtained, and is the employee responsible for it?
Is there disparate treatment and an appropriate penalty?

Just cause standard in computer misuse cases was described by Arbitrator Jeffrey W. Jacobs, NAA Member, “Computer & Internet Misuse – So, You Mean Once It’s Posted, It’s Really There Forever and I Could Get Fired For It?”, published by The Labor Arbitration Institute.

I’ll talk about each of these in upcoming posts.