Should this guy lose his job

[KRonn]

But nowadays you don't have to say anything on national media. Some 12 year old with a cheap phone can be filming you.

Andy Warhol got it wrong: in the future, everyone will be the target of an internet mob for 15 minutes for something dumb, obnoxious or insensitive they have said or done that got recorded by someone. They just better hope that during that 15 minutes, they aren't fired, arrested or stoned by vigilantes. 

[Josephus]

As I've said earlier, I am so glad I was stupid and twenty in a time we werent' recording everything.

Now I'm 48 and stupid, but nobody's bothering to film me.

[garbon]

As I've said earlier, I am so glad I was stupid and twenty in a time we werent' recording everything.

Now I'm 48 and stupid, but nobody's bothering to film me.

No one bothers to film me either and I'm still in my 20s.

[crazy canuck]

Then again, as others have stated, employers don't need good cause to fire someone.

That's quite a contentious, controversial statement, presented as an assertion, with no justification given. I suspect most people in the Western world would disagree with you (given that most Western countries have laws that say otherwise).

Marti, are you trying to be sarcastic or do you really not understand employment law?

[Josephus]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

[Malthus]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

Heh, very true.

If this employee is young, has not been employed long and holds a junior position, what will it cost Hydro One to fire him without cause. Probably only two or three months' severance — a small price to pay for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of free, positive advertising the power company has just captured.

It doesn't really matter if they have to pay this guy notice, which I think they likely would - the publicity boost was probably worth it.

[crazy canuck]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

Heh, very true.

If this employee is young, has not been employed long and holds a junior position, what will it cost Hydro One to fire him without cause. Probably only two or three months' severance — a small price to pay for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of free, positive advertising the power company has just captured.

It doesn't really matter if they have to pay this guy notice, which I think they likely would - the publicity boost was probably worth it.

I would add to Howard's analysis that not only did they get some great free advertising but they also avoided a huge reputational risk if they didn't deal with this.  Unlike the CBC.

[Malthus]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

Heh, very true.

If this employee is young, has not been employed long and holds a junior position, what will it cost Hydro One to fire him without cause. Probably only two or three months' severance — a small price to pay for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of free, positive advertising the power company has just captured.

It doesn't really matter if they have to pay this guy notice, which I think they likely would - the publicity boost was probably worth it.

I would add to Howard's analysis that not only did they get some great free advertising but they also avoided a huge reputational risk if they didn't deal with this.  Unlike the CBC.

I don't think it's all that analogous - Gomeshi was a media star, this guy was some sort of midlevel backroom computer dude. Also, the accusations in the CBC case were a lot more serious than public boorishness.

[crazy canuck]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

Heh, very true.

If this employee is young, has not been employed long and holds a junior position, what will it cost Hydro One to fire him without cause. Probably only two or three months' severance — a small price to pay for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of free, positive advertising the power company has just captured.

It doesn't really matter if they have to pay this guy notice, which I think they likely would - the publicity boost was probably worth it.

I would add to Howard's analysis that not only did they get some great free advertising but they also avoided a huge reputational risk if they didn't deal with this.  Unlike the CBC.

I don't think it's all that analogous - Gomeshi was a media star, this guy was some sort of midlevel backroom computer dude. Also, the accusations in the CBC case were a lot more serious than public boorishness.

This guy was identified in a stupid act that went viral.   I agree that what Gomeshi is alleged to have done is a lot more serious.  But are you suggesting that if Hydro had done nothing they would have received no criticism?

[Malthus]

http://business.financialpost.com/executive/management-hr/firing-employee-got-hydro-one-a-lot-of-publicity-if-its-for-cause-thats-a-bonus

Heh, very true.

If this employee is young, has not been employed long and holds a junior position, what will it cost Hydro One to fire him without cause. Probably only two or three months' severance — a small price to pay for the hundreds of thousands of dollars of free, positive advertising the power company has just captured.

It doesn't really matter if they have to pay this guy notice, which I think they likely would - the publicity boost was probably worth it.

I would add to Howard's analysis that not only did they get some great free advertising but they also avoided a huge reputational risk if they didn't deal with this.  Unlike the CBC.

I don't think it's all that analogous - Gomeshi was a media star, this guy was some sort of midlevel backroom computer dude. Also, the accusations in the CBC case were a lot more serious than public boorishness.

This guy was identified in a stupid act that went viral.   I agree that what Gomeshi is alleged to have done is a lot more serious.  But are you suggesting that if Hydro had done nothing they would have received no criticism?

I dunno. Apparently, there were others at the game doing the same thing, and all that their employers are doing is releasing statements dissassociating themselves from the employees' comments, and saying they would "address it".

From the artcle:

Cognex Corp., which employs the man in the TFC jersey, released a statement Tuesday afternoon but would not confirm his identity.

"While the individual was attending the event on his own time and was not at a Cognex activity, the views expressed are totally inconsistent with Cognex's values, and we find such comments reprehensible," company spokesman Sarah Laskowski said, adding they "will be addressing it."

If Hydro had done that - rather than summarily firing the guy - would there have been a ton of bad publicity and a serious reputational risk? I guess the experiment is - is this Cognex Corp. seeing a ton of bad publicity?

[crazy canuck]

Here is a fairly good article from the CBC about the risk of termination for actions unrelated to employment duties.  The key thing is the reputational risk to the employer.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/firing-of-shawn-simoes-for-off-duty-fhritp-video-reflects-employment-trend-1.3071919

[crazy canuck]

If Hydro had done that - rather than summarily firing the guy - would there have been a ton of bad publicity and a serious reputational risk? I guess the experiment is - is this Cognex Corp. seeing a ton of bad publicity?

The difference is everyone knows who the public company is and the public generally interacts with that entity on a regular basis.  Do people even know what Cognex Corp does?

[Malthus]

If Hydro had done that - rather than summarily firing the guy - would there have been a ton of bad publicity and a serious reputational risk? I guess the experiment is - is this Cognex Corp. seeing a ton of bad publicity?

The difference is everyone knows who the public company is and the public generally interacts with that entity on a regular basis.  Do people even know what Cognex Corp does?

Fair enough - but in my opinion, had the employer simply issued a statement like that of Cognex Corp., any "reputational damage" would have been minimal or non-existant. While people are scrambling to congratulate Hydro for firing this guy (particularly provincial Liberal politicians - there is nothing they like better than a government-owned utility displaying socially positive behaviour  ), I don't think there would be any fallout or demand that 'simply dissociating yourself and promising discipline isn't enough - thou must immediately fire the guy'. 

Though of course, having done it once, there may well be in the future - particularly if it is a Hydro Exec caught doing something nasty (naturally, the provincial Libs will not be taking this lesson to heart as far as they themselves go!  )

[Martinus]

What is the Hydro One corporation's business?

[Malthus]

What is the Hydro One corporation's business?

They are the government-owned electrical utility in this province.

Adding spice to the mix is that the guy to be fired was just senior enough to be making over 100K, which amounts are publicly published.