Nlb V. Pier Sixty

1. The NLRB has made findings regarding the use of employee posts on social media sites to discipline or terminate those employees. Typically, these cases occur when an employee posts negative information about his or her current employer or boss. Sometimes, these are public, and other times, the employer uses spies or fake friending to see the Facebook page of the employee.

(NLRB v. Pier Sixty, LLC, April 21, 2017, Cabranes, J.).

Pier Sixty operates a catering company based out in New York, the manager Robert McSweeney gave Hernan Perez commands in a “harsh tone” in which was according to the NLRB. Mcsweeneys attitude angered Perez and views it as the normality of the continued disrespect for the employees. Over forty- five minutes after

When analyzing the whole case the NLRB’s decision was that pier sixty violated the NLRA by discharging Perez. The abusive behavior stands out to be the issue Perez’s use of obscenities within the company in which qualifies for protection under the NLRA, four- factor test established by the NLRB. The test factors out, the place of discussion, the subject matter, the description of the employee’s outburst and was it provoked in anyway by the employers unfair practice. In conclusion, the NLRA decided that the Facebook post was hardly a threat in the workplace and shouldn’t have received such an unlawful consequence. With the gathered research, I do agree with the NLRB’s decision because it mainly revolves around the misconduct of the employer himself. Yes, I do believe that Perez is wrong for posting such harmful and hurtful words however, if a person reaches his boiling point the person will explode and this is exactly what Hernan Perez did. Although, he shouldn’t have received an unlawful consequence that was determined by the Aggressor, because of how McSweeney had treated his employees and doesn’t entirely care about Perez. The court broke it down into three parts when

I believe that the decision would have an effect on all aspects of the case above at my workplace. According to the case study it states” For one employee, it was just the latest example of management’s ‘continuing disrespect for employees’”. In this case it starts with how the employer treats the employees, at my current workplace profanity is used but not in a direct manner. My employer sets an example for all to never disrespect each other and treat each other like family. In order to eliminate issues among the workplace among the workplace the decision in this case would be useful to create a balance and a level of boundaries for employees to determine what is the right way to use social media using the appropriate standards according to the working conditions. In my workplace, Sephora, social media is a huge factor in our own company. Each store holds their own Instagram account and tags the cast members that are featured in the photos, which means it’s also important for the cast members to keep a clean social media account because we represent the company’s image. This means it is not prudent for me or any of my coworkers to post messages or commentaries on social media which could undermine the company’s relationship with the employees, in order to prevent future reoccurrence just like in the NLRB v. Pier sixty LLC.