{"id":23494,"date":"2016-10-20T17:16:02","date_gmt":"2016-10-20T21:16:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cccc.org\/news_blogs\/?p=23494"},"modified":"2016-10-20T17:16:02","modified_gmt":"2016-10-20T21:16:02","slug":"social-media-trolls-and-the-workplace","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cccc.org\/news_blogs\/legal\/2016\/10\/20\/social-media-trolls-and-the-workplace\/","title":{"rendered":"Social Media Trolls and the Workplace"},"content":{"rendered":"

Authored by Philip Milley, Associate Director of Legal Affairs\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Have you ever read the comments on a Facebook post and cringed? The cruel and unrelenting nature of public comment has led some news sites to remove comment sections altogether. I am constantly surprised at the tone, cruelty, and content\u00a0of the comments some make online. Social media has developed into an area where\u00a0no-holds are barred.<\/p>\n

Social media has\u00a0many benefits and it is no coincidence that use of social media to\u00a0share content, gain feedback, and increase online traffic is common place among charities. Organizations, not just charities, rarely turn their attention to the risks associated with social media use until there is a problem. Some organizations have adopted policies to manage\u00a0employee use of\u00a0social media and to\u00a0set rules for\u00a0employees engaging\u00a0with the public. These policies generally aim to protect the organization from productivity loss and civil lawsuits.<\/p>\n

A recent arbitration decision[i]<\/a> represents a shifted focus on social media use by organizations to the protection of employees from harmful\u00a0posts. The decision focuses on\u00a0the obligations under occupational health and human rights legislation to provide\u00a0workplaces free of\u00a0harassment[ii]<\/a>. The significance of the arbitrator’s decision is that social media accounts may now be\u00a0considered an extension of the \u201cworkplace\u201d thereby triggering employer\u00a0obligations to protect employees from harassment.<\/p>\n

The facts of this case are straightforward. The Toronto Transit Commission (\u201cTTC\u201d), maintained a Twitter account to engage with the public and respond to complaints.\u00a0 The account was monitored by TTC staff who responded to numerous tweets each day that expressed, among other things, dissatisfaction with the service provided by TTC. Staff were constantly overwhelmed by the amount of abuse being inflicted on them by the public. Examples of abusive tweets include racist and homophobic remarks, vulgarity, and death threats. The employees raised concerns about the Twitter account that permitted customers to make comments which made them feel intimidated, bullied, harassed, and threatened.<\/p>\n

The TTC argued that it was not possible to regulate the public and ensure that no negative comments are posted on the account.\u00a0When the TTC received profane or otherwise inappropriate tweets, it generally sent a response indicating that it does not condone abusive, profane, derogatory or offensive comments, and asked the tweeter to please refrain from making those comments. If the comments continued the tweeter could be blocked. The arbitrator stated that while those types of responses may dissuade some from sending offensive tweets, they are certainly not universally successful in that regard, as they sometimes result in further more offensive tweets.<\/p>\n

Due to the two-way nature of the social media account, the arbitrator concluded that the employer facilitated a public forum and it reasonably ought to have known that its employees were being harassed. Ultimately, TTC failed to take all reasonable and practical measures to protect its employees from the abusive tweets that led to a poisoned work environment and harassment.<\/p>\n

The arbitrator concluded that the employer must take positive and reasonable steps to see that the workplace is free from harassment. Although an employer cannot control everything that everyone does, it is not relieved of the obligation to provide a safe workplace.<\/p>\n

What this case means for Charities<\/em><\/p>\n

While this case does not have the force of legislation or court decision charities should still take note as this case may signal an acknowledgment that the law is developing with technology as social media accounts may form part of the virtual workplace. Indecent, inflammatory or insulting\u00a0messages\u00a0from the public may subject\u00a0employees to harassment. The challenge of regulating public comment on social media accounts will not alleviate obligations to maintain a workplace free from harassment.<\/p>\n

Managing public commentary on social media is a challenge on the best of days. Unfortunately, the arbitrator made no specific statement\u00a0as to what steps were necessary for the TTC to meet its legal obligations. He did, however, note that the following considerations may be helpful in mitigating the potential for harassment. He noted at paragraphs 133, 146 and 147:<\/p>\n