Personal and professional - Where's the line???

LegacyUser

BBC.com wrote:

DVLA clerk sacked after sex film

The clips of Ms Muirhead having sex were sent on a mobile phone
A DVLA worker whose mobile phone video-clips of herself having sex were sent to her colleagues has been sacked for gross misconduct.
The Swansea-based Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) clerk filmed herself having sex with her boyfriend. The film was then forwarded to staff.

Heather Muirhead, 23, was dismissed following an inquiry by the DVLA after senior staff saw the clips.

A friend of Ms Muirhead has said she may go to an industrial tribunal.

Ms Muirhead's dismissal follows an inquiry at DVLA into "alleged circulation of unacceptable material".

The 23-year-old made the mobile phone film with her boyfriend, chef Lee Jones, 26, while on a romantic hotel break.

It was then texted to staff at the DVLA, eventually reaching nearly 300 people.

A junior member of staff has been dismissed for gross misconduct

DVLA spokesman

More than 6,000 people work for the DVLA, most of them based in a 20-storey building in the Morriston area of Swansea.

Many are said to have viewed the clips by the time managers stepped in.

A DVLA spokesman said: "A junior member of staff has been dismissed for gross misconduct."

But a friend of Ms Muirhead is reported to have said: "She is very upset about being sacked and is thinking of going to an employment tribunal.

"Although she was worried about going back to work, she didn't want to be sacked."

The DVLA processes driving licences for the UK and is one of the biggest employers in south Wales.

Buddy of mine works in this office, and sent me this story last week when it broke. He forwaded on this article to me this morning.

Both he and I agreed that we felt she was hard done by. Maybe if the phones involved were property of the company, they would have a case, but if you forward a message from your personal mobile to phone to a friend, who just also happens to be a work colleague, why is this any business of your employer?

I may have overlooked something, and in fairness it did go over the top and made it to almost 300 people, but I would reckon she has quite a strong case in an employment tribunal. They said she was done for gross misconduct, but if she is doing her job properly, what has her personal life got to do with it?

I'm not too well up on employment law, so your opinions would be most welcome.

bru

PS - No I havent see the vid, although I would like to!

seamus

What this doesn't state is how the video came into the possession of another DVLA employee. As you point out, it also doesn't say if any of the phone are company property.

Is her boyfriend an employee there? Did he forward it to another employee who's a mate of theirs? Or did she send it to them? Did she play up to it? It says she's upset about being dismissed, not about the video being forwarded to 300 people in her work.

There are too many questions not answered by that article to make a judgement. Perhaps she had already been warned for gross misconduct, and the Senior Management saw this, and said "ah feck this, she's a disruptive influence on our office", and kicked her out.

It's also reasonable to expect all employees, while on company property or when dealing with colleagues (mates or not), to act professionally, as a representative of the company. Anything that could cause the image of the company to be tarnished, internally or externally, is fair game as "gross misconduct".

LegacyUser

Funnily enough when I wrote - "I'm not too well up on employment law, so your opinions would be most welcome." I though the first person to reply would be Seamus!!
Seems you know a good bit about this from me reading various threads.

Cheers

bru

seamus

bruachain wrote:

Funnily enough when I wrote - "I'm not too well up on employment law, so your opinions would be most welcome." I though the first person to reply would be Seamus!!
Seems you know a good bit about this from me reading various threads.

Just what I've pieced together from hanging around here
I'm frequently wrong/misguided.

WizZard

The article doesn't give all the facts, and therefore an informed decision cannot be made.

In saying that I would agree with the OP. If the phone that SHE (or boyfriend) used to transmit the video to another employee then she should have been fired. Otherwise I can't see any "gross misconduct". It really shouldn't matter what anyone does in their spare time.

However, if personal relationships are frowned upon in the company, and her boyfriend was also an employee then maybe there is a case for "Gross misconduct".

LegacyUser

seamus wrote:

Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: :noitacoL
Posts: 12,279

An you've been around a while! Wonder if there'll be any other comments...

bru

LegacyUser

WizZard wrote:

In saying that I would agree with the OP.

Forgive my naiveté, I've seen this acronym around various threads -"OP"??

SteM

bruachain wrote:

Forgive my naiveté, I've seen this acronym around various threads -"OP"??

Original Poster.

LegacyUser

Cheers Stem - I'm still getting to grips with the boards lingo

Eoin

bruachain wrote:

Cheers Stem - I'm still getting to grips with the boards lingo

Well, I'm sure by now you have noticed people saying "tbh" for absolutely no reason at all. :rolleyes:

The following is all my opinion, and not based on fact.

I think one of the more important questions is whether the phone that initally sent the video (i.e. the lady who was fired), and the phone that it was sent to (her mate) were work phones or not. If they were not, then it is their business.

The only problem at this stage is whether her friend complained about having inapproriate content sent to him by a colleague. If he did complain, then I am sure it would be a justified dismissal for the lady in question.

However, if he had no problems with the video being sent to him, and he then sent it on - he is the one who is in the wrong by distributing inappropriate content.

WhiteWashMan

you also have to take into account the fact that you can be fired for bringing the name and reputation of the company you work for into bad light.

that may be what their gross misconduct is.

there are an awful lot of clauses in contracts these days. and yes while the actual act of filming yourself having sex and sending it to your friends, there are other matters to consider.

WizZard

So if I were to do something bad (depending on your viewpoint) like that, and subsequently someone said "Oh, he works for xxxx", could I be fired??? Even if I did it in my own time?

Complicated case tbh :rolleyes: , but I'd say she does have some grounds for unfair dismissal in a tribunal

seamus

WizZard wrote:

So if I were to do something bad (depending on your viewpoint) like that, and subsequently someone said "Oh, he works for xxxx", could I be fired??? Even if I did it in my own time?

Complicated case tbh :rolleyes: , but I'd say she does have some grounds for unfair dismissal in a tribunal

Imagine, for example, you worked for an Accountancy firm, and it was discovered that in your spare time that you nixered for a friend, fiddling his accounts, fiddling his taxes, etc. If you were charged and found guilty of this, I believe that the firm would be well within their rights to fire you, since what you did refelcts badly on the firm (if you're working there, perhaps you're doing the same fiddling for corporate clients), even though it was done completely external to the firm and in your own personal life.

WizZard

Quite a good analogy seamus. I see what you mean now.

Although it's hardly relevant to the above story, unless she was screwing her boss too

Eoin

WizZard wrote:

Quite a good analogy seamus. I see what you mean now.

Although it's hardly relevant to the above story, unless she was screwing her boss too

Or actually doing something illegal, which would be more suited to the analogy.

LegacyUser

seamus wrote:

Imagine, for example, you worked for an Accountancy firm, and it was discovered that in your spare time that you nixered for a friend, fiddling his accounts, fiddling his taxes, etc. If you were charged and found guilty of this, I believe that the firm would be well within their rights to fire you, since what you did refelcts badly on the firm (if you're working there, perhaps you're doing the same fiddling for corporate clients), even though it was done completely external to the firm and in your own personal life.

I think the Accountancy Firm would probably offer you a senior partnership!!

the_syco

I think the wording may mean emails, but if it was worded loosely enough, it may cover phones. Also, unless she sent the message to the senior person, I think she has a case.

Eoin

if you forward a message from your personal mobile to phone to a friend, who just also happens to be a work colleague, why is this any business of your employer?

Actually, re-reading the article I can't see where she just texted it to one friend who then forwarded it on. I don't know if there is any real difference if she sent it to just 1 or 20 people, but to me it removes the distinction of sending it to a friend rather than to a colleague.

Either way, she was very stupid to send it to anyone in the first place.

PS - No I havent see the vid, although I would like to!

Surely only a matter of time before this hits d'internet.

<edit>
According to this site, she brought the phone into work to show some girlfriends in the office.
Someone then swiped the phone and sent it around the office.

I don't know if that actually changes anything - I would think that showing a number of colleagues that kind of thing at work is very unprofessional at the least, and it would have taken just one complaint from someone she showed it to, to leave her in trouble.

However, if someone did indeed pinch her phone and send it around, they are the ones who are also to blame.

Still think she was a fool to show anyone in the first place though.
</edit>

Duckjob

I suspect she won't have much success in any 'unfair dismissal' case.

I'd estimate that the idea of an employee who forms part of the public face of a company allowing a video to circulate in the public domain of her receiving a warm beef injection would be seen as a complete lack of regard to maintaining a professional image of her company.

Any contract I've signed has had a paragraph on upholding the company's professional image, not doing anything that would damage it etc, so I'd say the company is well covered there.

WizZard

For example:

What if I liked to go to S & M clubs dressed in rubber* and be flagellated by multiple masked strangers**. What if a newspaper publsihed pictures of same whilst on a "Look what happens in clubs" (think Sunday World) feature.
Should this prevent me from holding a senior management position in an accountancy firm***?

*I don't
**I don't
***I don't

BossArky

Not exactly related to the OP tbh

The previous company I worked for organised a European soccer competition bringing together teams from the various offices across the continent. The Latvians fancied their chances but were knocked out in the semi's and proceeded straight to the pub where they were pretty locked after a while. Arriving back to the hotel they trashed the place, stupidly thinking that what they did in the UK would not be traced back to Lativa.

The next time they showed up at work back in the home office the whole team got the boot. Unfortunate for them as it was a pretty good job going by Latvian standards.

The company position was that anyone travelling is representing the company, and therefore anything bad that happens brings the company into disrepute.

Devious

WizZard wrote:

For example:

What if I liked to go to S & M clubs dressed in rubber* and be flagellated by multiple masked strangers**. What if a newspaper publsihed pictures of same whilst on a "Look what happens in clubs" (think Sunday World) feature.
Should this prevent me from holding a senior management position in an accountancy firm***?

*I don't
**I don't
***I don't

Ahem. I should sincerely hope not.

WizZard

I knew well you'd pick up on that post!

amen

of course she should be fired. most companies have rules about email/texting anything of a sexual nature or anything that may be deemed offensive
just because its her and her boyfriend doesn't excuse what she did after all if was child porn everyone would be calling for her resignation

WizZard

Yes, because child porn is illegal.

But having sex with your partner is not illegal, nor is filming it. And I daresay sending it to a friend via email or phone is not illegal either.

However, to/from a company email address/phone would be. But that issue is not clear and, as I stated in my first post, we cannot make an informed decision on the matter because of that.

Eoin

amen wrote:

of course she should be fired. most companies have rules about email/texting anything of a sexual nature or anything that may be deemed offensive
just because its her and her boyfriend doesn't excuse what she did after all if was child porn everyone would be calling for her resignation

I doubt that there would be a thread if it was as clear cut as you say. The point being made was that it first sounded like the lady who was fired sent it to one colleague who was her mate.

If that colleague did not complain about being sent inappropriate content, but then forwarded it on to other people then that mate is the one distributing the material and is as much at fault as the girl who was fired.

It now transpires that she claims she did not forward it on to colleagues - she showed it to some friends at work, someone swiped her phone and forwarded it on. Yes, she is at fault for showing the content - but again, the point is that she did not send it on to a group of people, someone else did.

amen wrote:

after all if was child porn everyone would be calling for her resignation

That in itself is illegal no matter who you send it to, so it is not really relevant to this topic.

pickarooney

Deliberately viewing content of a lewd of pornographic nature in the workplace is usually grounds for dismissal, so all 300 employees should get the boot if any.