So damn glad I never bought in to Facebook Messenger. I still, reluctantly, have a facebook profile. :\

I deleted my facebook a long time ago.

I basically HAVE to have a facebook profile. :/

Family/job?

Starting a business.

a media business.

Oh.

Yeah.

R.I.P.

I wonder if there will come a time, if it isn't already here, where not having any social media accounts to spy on will be a 'red flag' to employers.

I mean... maybe?

"No facebook, no twitter... oh, but he has a Gab account? Well then... *next!*"

I've always valued internet anonymity.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it gets to that point.

Yeah, we do, but there's a new trend arising of watching people's other/out-of-work activities. I remember back when this kind of thing first started when someone I know got fired from Subway for comments she made while off-duty *about* Subway.

I mean, that qualifies as a conflict of interests

*Everyone* complains about their job at one point or another, though.

Some employers do include disparagement clauses, as well.

Well, sure.

Even if it's in passing.

The thing is, with social media, we've been toying with something that's EXTREMELY powerful, and yet we've been taking it for granted.

We don't really think about it, but when we post something on Twitter, or on Facebook, we've basically got the same potential as an advertiser does.

That's the difference between posting stuff on social media and saying something with a group of friends.

If that guy at Subway got a private text he sent to a friend, and fired them over that text

or a recorded conversation bitching about work

and got fired over that

100% in the guy's corner

but when you post something on Facebook

You've sent a message into the ether, and you no longer control it.

Someone could share it, and then it's gone.

I understand that, but it still sets a precedent.

I mean, yeah, it does, but Subway, the franchise owner, the district manager, the store manager - they're all required to protect their brand, and someone complaining specifically about Subway when they're paid by them, on social media where the wrong thing could take off beyond even the poster's control, It's a conflict of interest and a risk of brand deprecation.

I 100% understand why they did it. We're playing with powerful toys when it comes to social media.

Maybe they shouldn't give their employees a reason to complain then? Even just firing her over a comment could be seen in and of itself as bad practice. It shows underhandedness and might add legitimacy to the person's claim, where there otherwise might not be.
This isn't even to mention in this particular case where she wasn't going around saying 'Subway sucks' or something. It was years ago now, but if I remember she was complaining about her schedule.

well, I mean, I don't know the nature of the complaint

But complaining about work is something EVERYONE does, as you said before.

Yeah, and this was too small of a case, never got attention, and me being your only source can barely remember why. Perhaps she complained in the wrong way or said it in such a way where it could be seen another.

And it actually derailed the main point a bit: that there's this trend coming up of platforms monitoring their users (or jobs monitoring their employees) while off of that platform of off-duty from that job.

As someone who's a business owner, and has been an assistant manager in the past, I can say it would probably depend on the manner in which she complained. if she called Subway out by name, that would be a degree worse than just saying 'Work Sucks'.

Like Twitch monitoring people's activity on twitter and the like.

Yeah, no, I see your point there