NLRB putting the squeeze on Internet use policies?

The National Labor Relations Board has stepped into the discussion about what your employees can and can’t say over the Internet.
The NLRB has issued a complaint against a Connecticut ambulance service, alleging that it illegally fired an employee because she posted negative remarks about her supervisor on her personal Facebook page.
The complaint also claims that American Medical Response illegally denied union representation to the employee during an investigatory interview, and maintained and enforced an overly broad blogging and Internet posting policy.
Protected activity?
According to the NLRB, the employee was denied union representation in a inquiry into a customer complaint about her work. The employee subsequently posted a negative remark about the supervisor on her personal Facebook page, which drew supportive responses from her co-workers, and led to further negative comments about the supervisor from the employee.
The employee was suspended and later terminated for her Facebook postings and because such postings violated the company’s Internet policies.
The NLRB said the company’s policies “constitute interference with employees in the exercise of their right to engage in protected … activity.”
The company said the employee wasn’t fired simply because of her Facebook comments, but on account of  “multiple, serious issues.”
New wrinkle
The merits of the case aside, this story seems to throw a brand-new monkeywrench into the argument over what rights employers have to control what employees say about their companies in cyberspace.
Is the NLRB saying employees should be free to post whatever they wish — true or not — because such behavior falls into the category of “protected activity”?
That would certainly run counter to most employers’ Internet policies, and pretty much gut a company’s ability to protect itself — at least on the Internet — from the comments of disgruntled employees.
A hearing on the NLRB complaint is scheduled for  Jan. 25, 2011. For a look at the NLRB’s press release on the case, go here.