Hall of Shame

[expat]

Ivell Marketing & Logistics, in Clacton.

Not in our field, but these guys fired a 16-year-old office worker for posting on Facebook that she was bored at work. (She didn't name the company).

Bastards. Hope they get crunched.

[NotAllThere]

I like her picture on facebook - if she is "Kimberley Louise Swann".

[BrilloPad]

Did she write the comments from work?

Assuming no, I feel the company should have warned her first. You have to be careful what you put on the internet.

[Churchill]

Did she write the comments from work?

Assuming no, I feel the company should have warned her first. You have to be careful what you put on the internet.

So, if she didn't name the company and she didn't post the comment at work, wtfpb?

[Sockpuppet]

If you read it she had been there 3 weeks.

From my experience of things like this if she had been there 3 weeks and described the job as boring she may not have had the best work ethic there.

End of the day just be careful what you write about work.

[NickFitz]

If you read it she had been there 3 weeks.

From my experience of things like this if she had been there 3 weeks and described the job as boring she may not have had the best work ethic there.

End of the day just be careful what you write about work.

The point where she hit fail was when she granted her work colleagues access to her Facebook page, and either one of them grassed her up to the boss, or the boss was one of said colleagues.

This suggests that she was actually integrating quite well with the team - her Facebook profile isn't public (which is sensible) so she had to grant them access for them to be able to see the comment, meaning that she regarded them as friends, or at least trusted acquaintances.

As somebody said... Oh WTH, hang on while I find the link... right, as the TUC pointed out, it's akin to following her down the pub, eavesdropping on her when she tells her friends that her day at work has been boring, then sacking her for that.

If every employer in the country adopted this strategy, we'd have about 40 million unemployed - and that would include the people who had done the sacking, as they'd have no staff left and their businesses would collapse

[NotAllThere]

Given that journalists typically aren't too worried about the truth, never mind the whole truth, maybe she was sacked for other reasons, and decided to make some money out of a made up story.

[Gonzo]

Given that journalists typically aren't too worried about the truth, never mind the whole truth, maybe she was sacked for other reasons, and decided to make some money out of a made up story.

It doesn't look like they were desperate to keep her on.

I like the quote:

It is unfortunate that we didn't come up to Miss Swann's expectations on this occasion and we wish her every success in the future.

As reported in the Daily Mail .

[centurian]

If you read it she had been there 3 weeks.

From my experience of things like this if she had been there 3 weeks and described the job as boring she may not have had the best work ethic there.

End of the day just be careful what you write about work.

Yes, people seem to be under the impression that "free speech" means that all speech is free (i.e. that it comes without any cost).

What is means is that you cannot be locked up for what you say (i.e. you get to remain 'free'). Even with this, there are exceptions (incitement of violence, ractial hate etc.)

The fact is that everything you say carries a cost. Usually the cost is very low, but sometimes it can turn out to be very expensive.