Brons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3019 posts, RR: 4 Posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3532 times:
A Delta flight attendant has made the news as being a person fired for keeping an online blog. Apparently she had pictures of herself wearing her Delta FA uniform on a flight. Some apparently were suggestive and one in particular a portion of her bra could be seen.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13324 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3392 times:
There are many legitment fears of blogs and bloggers today about companies and involving their employees. There is the fear of posting of proparitary information, information that isn't to be for public use as could go afoul of SEC laws and other regulations, data that could be used by competitors and beheavor of people that could hurt reprutations or how a company want's to be seen. Almost all employees of USA companies are required to sign confidentiality agreements as to company information or the use of company computers for same.
Alb222 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3238 times:
Quoting Airgeek12 (Reply 5): This is really old.. I remember reading about this a LONG time ago. I still don't see why DL made such a big deal of it, though.
DL as any company including Google and Microsoft are within their rights to fire an employe who is acting in a manner not in the best interest of that company. QofS photos went over the line as they identified her to DL. Can't believe this is still making news.
Lnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1622 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3128 times:
Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 8): Terminating somebody who has the freedom of speech is not within their rights
Flyingbronco, I don't frequently agree with you (even though I have never replied to you haha, but I lurk in the background, agreeing and disagreeing with people while I sit here at my computer), but I have to agree with you on that one.
She was outside of work, and if she was under an assumed name, this is wrong.
For a country who prides themselves on democratic behaviours, since your latest Pres has been brought in, you've lost a *lot* of the rights bestowed on you from the forefathers.
GlobeTrekker From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 851 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3059 times:
KLM, BA, Transavia, Martinair and AF employees who blog, were called in by their employer at some point and were told to never appear in uniform, never mention the company name, not to take photos of private areas or the aircraft in a recognizable way, change the dates or destination of flights you are working.
However, when the same F/A is on the flight as a pax, she/he may take any pics he wants of the aircraft and crew, mention destination and date. Because he/she is off duty. But it must not be written that you work for the company.
Of course everyone can read through the lines............. and not everyone adhere to these rules.
The World Is A Book And Those Who Do Not Travel Read Only A Page
Flaps From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1323 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3013 times:
Perhaps if she had left out the company name, the uniform shots, and the cabin interior pics that easily identify the company she might have been ok. Her freedom of speech was not infringed upon, she is not being arrested. She is free to continue blogging away. A private company has the right to protect its, image, information and interests. She failed in her role to uphold her end of the employer/employee relationship and therefore forfeited her job. We personally may or may not like that but this employer rights vs free speech issue has been upheld in the employers favor time and again in the courts.