Watch yourself, even when you’re not on the company clock.
Bad behaviour during off hours can have serious repercussions
Video footage, recorded on a smartphone, shows a woman ranting and launching racist comments at a group of other patrons in an Alberta Denny’s restaurant this month. Posted to the internet, it rapidly went viral. News outlets across Canada carried the story and broadcast the footage.
Unsurprisingly, the woman in the video was identified, and her name quickly became attached to the story.
Also unsurprisingly, she is now unemployed. Once the video footage came to the attention of the woman’s employer, she lost her job.
This incident, like the well-publicized case in 2015 of a Hydro One employee in Ontario fired for making vulgar and obnoxious statements to a female reporter on Mother’s Day, should serve as a pointed reminder and warning to employees: Offensive and injudicious off-duty conduct can jeopardize your employment.
To say that smartphones are ubiquitous would be an understatement; and to assume that one can engage in public displays of racism, vulgarity, or loutishness without being caught on camera is now hopelessly naive. Rather, employees should assume that such conduct will find its way onto social media, and — for all intents and purposes — onto their resumés.
In the age of background checks and social media, a prospective employee’s printed resumé is only the beginning of what an employer might be able to learn about the candidate. I routinely recommend to my employer clients that — in addition to running detailed background checks where the nature of the position warrants it — they run a basic Google search on anyone they consider hiring. With just a few simple keystrokes, an employer can often access social media postings and other content generated and/or shared by a candidate, and can frequently find any notoriety attached to the individual.
The employer should regard the candidate’s character and judgment in the same light as they would statements in a cover letter or job interview.
In the case of the aforementioned hooligan who worked for Hydro One (and was ultimately reinstated to his role after a lengthy suspension), his conduct on that day will follow him for the rest of his career. Now, likewise, the Alberta Denny’s incident will hang as a perpetual millstone around that woman’s neck. One can only imagine the difficulty that she will face in becoming re-employed.
There are perhaps those who would debate the “fairness” of judging an individual (and permitting his or her career being ruined) based on a single incident of outrageous behaviour caught on video, and which he or she may well regret. However, for legal purposes, the relevant question is whether an employer is permitted to terminate an individual’s employment (or disqualify an individual for employment) based on offduty conduct.
The simple fact is that many employers are unwilling to be associated with certain attitudes and behaviours; and if an employee (and their association with the employer) is thrust into the public eye on account of such verifiable behaviours, the employer will naturally protect its own reputation. For better or for worse, that priority, and the employer’s urgent imperative for damage control, will frequently trump any notion of what may or may not be “fair” to the employee. To state the obvious, employees are well advised to remember that, and to govern themselves accordingly — even when they are off the clock.
Employees must also understand that it is entirely legal for an employer to make decisions about hiring or keeping an employee based on offduty conduct. And, more often than not, it is lawful and permissible (and indeed sensible and prudent) for employers to seek out and consider all resumé content. In fact, if the conduct is sufficiently serious and so obviously damaging to the employer’s brand, it can be cause for discharge, not only permitting the employer to fire the employee but to deprive them of severance pay.