Social media in Toronto Emergency Services

[mariomike]

National Post

"Two Toronto firefighters terminated over ‘unacceptable’ sexist tweets, third reportedly fired over Facebook post":
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/09/16/two-toronto-firefighters-terminated-over-unacceptable-sexist-tweets-third-reportedly-fired-over-facebook-post/

The report does not mention if the terminated employees were still in their "probationary period".

( 12 months from Date of Hire, and can be extended for another 6 months based on performance. )

 

[pbi]

I'm of two minds about this issue.

I'm 100% clear about misusing official systems: when I was still in uniform, I dealt with several cases of it over the years, with no sympathy. The rules are clear, and offenders are very stupid. But maybe it's not that simple here.

One the one hand, I have a 24 year old daughter who has (in the past) expressed thoughts about becoming a firefighter. She has since pursued another path, but if my daughter was in the fire service, or the EMS, I would not want idiots posting rude, stupid and sexist comments about her, "private" or not. Keep this kind of adolescent garbage to yourself. Grow up and realize that strong, capable women are here to stay: get on with it.

On the other hand, these stupid tweets were  not (as far as I know) done using the City of Toronto's computers, mobile phones, etc. They were, in a sense, "private communication". We can argue about whether Twitter or Facebook, etc are really "private", but in any case these two didn't use official systems to spread these thoughts.

So, if that's the case, to what extent does the employer actually have the right to fire people based on unofficial communications using private means?  (as opposed to just calling them in for a "Hey Stupid" talk...). Was this a knee jerk? Has this been tested in court?

I'm just asking, and not rhetorically either. :-\

 

[Jarnhamar]

I realize some choice comments are made behind the veneer of anonymity of our screen names here at army.ca but I'm glad "Hero Matt" and friends are being brought to task over the disrespectful comments they're publicly making on their social media.

Wanna be a public servant and call yourself a hero? Act like it.

 

[pbi]

I tend to agree with you, but are they being fired for their thoughts?

 

[Jarnhamar]

I tend to agree with you, but are they being fired for their thoughts?

Good question. I think in a case like this it's a matter of public servants publicly identifying themselves as such and making comments which creates controversy or possibly impacting public image and recruiting.

 

[mariomike]

So, if that's the case, to what extent does the employer actually have the right to fire people based on unofficial communications using private means?

This seems to be the most recent policy.
https://wx.toronto.ca/intra/hr/policies.nsf/a8170e9c63677876852577d7004ff7f8/5762e10a91b66d6b85257bb80068e8af?OpenDocument

Date Approved:  July 17, 2013

If they ( article does not say ) are still "probies", they can be let go at any time within the probationary period.

On the other hand, the union may win the grievance and they get sent to sensitivity training.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Good question. I think in a case like this it's a matter of public servants publicly identifying themselves as such and making comments which creates controversy or possibly impacting public image and recruiting.

The fact is their behavior contravened the code of conduct for city employees. This alone gives the city a lot of leeway in regards to discipline. It is likely a document that you agree to abide by at the start of your employment, signing off that you are aware that contraventions of said policy could result in dismissal. And as mariomike says, if they are probies all they have to do is sneeze wrong and they get canned.

And I agree with OZ, a little humility in this line of work goes a lot further than braggadocio and bluster...ie 'hero matt'. He must have been a pleasure to work with.

 

[pbi]

On the other hand, the union may win the grievance and they get sent to sensitivity training.

The policy you posted seems pretty clear. Still, I will be interested to see the outcome if the union fights it.

 

[Scott]

What do we say here all the time? Have your thoughts about whatever. Be as vulgar, bigoted and flat out arseholish as you want within the four walls of your own home. But when you start making it known to others what a fucking neanderthal you are then you are fair game.

I agree with Matt getting sacked. Wonder how heroic he feels now?

I hope, but doubt, that the union leaves this alone.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I hope, but doubt, that the union leaves this alone.

The union can't "leave it alone".  They would be paying members so they are entitled to a defence.

What most union-haters fail to realize that IF management has followed the rules then a fired member is almost always out of luck. Most re-instatements are because of management screw-ups somewhere in the process and that is not the union's fault. [though that always seems to be the rallying cry]

 

[Scott]

Right, I am not having this go down the pro versus anti union road. Not sure if you're approaching it thinking I was, but that's not the case. And, for the record, I have little care for the matter - I can sit gloriously on the fence and agree in some cases, disagree in others.

If he got fired the wrong way then the city eats it, full stop.

When I said I hope the union stays out of it I was assuming that the city had done things right and thus hoping they do not get into this because they feel the reasoning was wrong or whatever.

Of course he pays his dues for them to make sure it was done on the up and up, that's not in dispute, at least from me.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I wasn't gearing that towards you, rather the notion that will surely follow that the union would be to blame should they get thier jobs back.

Don't worry, I've been in lots of meetings where I wanted the person gone also, but........................

 

[mariomike]

The union had this to say, "The association is outraged by these terminations and will make every effort to have these members reinstated.":
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2013/09/20130917-123013.html

 

[Jarnhamar]

TORONTO - The Toronto Professional Fire Fighters Association is "outraged" over the firing of three firefighters over their social media posts.

Is the Professional fire fighters association also outraged over their members making jokes about abuse against women?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Probably quite friggin' pissed that some of thier members could be that stupid.  But does your lawyer state to the media that he's pissed that your a POS wife beater just before he files an appeal?  No..............?

 

[pbi]

Is the Professional fire fighters association also outraged over their members making jokes about abuse against women?

Good one.

Probably quite friggin' pissed that some of thier members could be that stupid.  But does your lawyer state to the media that he's pissed that your a POS wife beater just before he files an appeal?  No..............?

Equally good comeback.

I agree about management's responsibility to do it right. No different than the CF. I only had one experience with UNDE over DND employee discipline, and it was a positive one. We had worked pretty carefully to make the case against one individual, and when we  finally called the employee in and laid out the case, all the UNDE rep did was turn to the employee and say "Well, what do you think about that?". He never raised an issue because it was clear that we had the guy dead to rights, all paperwork done, and probably could have sacked him but didn't.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Bruce is 100% right.  I got hung up on the name they called themselves (and what I thought it should represent) and not their function.  They wouldn't be very good at what their supposed to do if they publicly cast doubt on their clients.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I agree about management's responsibility to do it right. No different than the CF. I only had one experience with UNDE over DND employee discipline, and it was a positive one. We had worked pretty carefully to make the case against one individual, and when we  finally called the employee in and laid out the case, all the UNDE rep did was turn to the employee and say "Well, what do you think about that?". He never raised an issue because it was clear that we had the guy dead to rights, all paperwork done, and probably could have sacked him but didn't.

..........and that's it in a nutshell. If everything is by the book then that's all the Union rep can say.  [pssst, secret,.......most times the rep is probably happy as a clam]

 

[mariomike]

I believe this is a first at Toronto Emergency Services.

I am sure many Toronto Firefighters and Paramedics will be following the union's grievance with interest.

Our Department is likely aware of the "'Bad Lieutenant" ( an EMS Supervisor ) lawsuit in New York City.

In another case, the Commissioner's son was forced to resign as an EMT because of things he posted.

Last month, they issued a Social Media Policy to their Firefighters, Paramedics and EMT's:
http://fdnyemswebsite.com/Page15.html

Although the laws are different, I would not be surprised if our Department writes up something similar.

 

[Sheerin]

If it can be traced back to you and your employer then you really need to be careful about what you say on a public stage. 

My service has had a few issues in the past with people posting inappropriate things to facebook, one resulting in a hefty suspension.  There are no private thoughts on the internet.  A fact that many are oblivious to.