NLRB stance on social networks getting a little clearer

The National Labor Relations Board just can’t seem to get enough of this new-fangled social networking business. But a couple of recent developments provide some clarification on where the agency’s headed on the issue.
First, NLRB officials decided that the firing of a Tucson newspaper reporter for improper comments on Twitter wasn’t a violation of federal labor regs.
Then the agency announced it had filed a complaint against a Buffalo, NY-based non-profit organization following the firing of five employees who criticized their working conditions on Facebook.
Offensive tweets
The Tucson case centered on a crime reporter for the Arizona Daily Star. Although the paper had no written social media policy, editors encouraged reporters and other staffers to use social media to promote its coverage.
The reporter got in hot water after using Twitter to run some sensational items on crime in Tucson (one example: “You stay homicidal, Tucson. See Star Net for bloody deets”) and make negative comments about co-workers and headlines in the paper’s sports section. He also tweeted about a misspelled headline that appeared on a local television station’s Twitter feed: “Stupid TV people.”
After the TV station complained, the reporter was fired. He complained to the NLRB, charging that his termination violated federal labor regs.
But NLRB counsel Barry Kearney advised officials that the reporter’s firing didn’t violate rules protecting employees’ rights to discuss workplace issues — he’d been sacked for inappropriate and offensive Twitter postings that were banned under company policy.
You can read the full advice memorandum here, courtesy of Employer Law Report.
Facebook exchange was protected, agency says
Here’s a look at the Buffalo case, from a press release from the NLRB:
The case involves an employee who, in advance of a meeting with management about working conditions, posted to her Facebook page a coworker’s allegation that employees did not do enough to help the organization’s clients.
The initial post generated responses from other employees who defended their job performance and criticized working conditions, including work load and staffing issues.
After learning of the posts, the agency discharged the five employees who participated, claiming that their comments constituted harassment of the employee originally mentioned in the post.
The complaint alleges that the Facebook discussion was “protected concerted activity”  — it involved a conversation among co-workers about their terms and conditions of employment, including their job performance and staffing levels.
The case is scheduled for a hearing before an administrative law judge June 22.
Drawing a line
What’s to be learned from these two cases? Seems like the NLRB is, indeed, narrowing the criteria for what sort of social media usage is “protected activity.”
In Tucson, the employee was fired for violating company policy and standards of conduct. The offending tweets didn’t concern general employment issues like working conditions or salary levels.
In Buffalo, the employees were discussing workloads, staffing levels and other employment issues. Therefore — in the eyes of the NLRB — that exchange was protected under labor law.