How Private is Your “Private” Account? – Lougheed Imports Ltd (West Coast Mazda) v United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1518

Lougheed Imports Ltd (West Coast Mazda) v United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1518, 2010 CanLII 62482 (BC LRB) – An Overview

• There were three employees that worked together at West Coast Mazda: JT, FY, and AP. All 3 were friends on Facebook.
• The company (through FY) had been monitoring JT’s Facebook account, initially due to workplace concerns, and then due to union concerns.
• JT’s posts continued to get darker and angrier, and he eventually removed FY from his “friends” list.
• JT received a write-up for behaviour that disturbed a meeting, but the write-up did not make any mention of his concerning Facebook posts, as JC, his manager, was not sure how to address them.
• JT made further angry Facebook posts, which JC viewed with someone else’s help.
• JT then made posts that were personally derogatory towards his managers, which his managers were concerned many other people would see. AP got involved in a conversation with JT, generally disparaging their workplace.
• AP subsequently deleted his Facebook account, after other friends reached out asking about his posts.
• In meetings with management and union representation, both JT and AP were asked about their Facebook accounts and any inappropriate or critical comments they may have made. Both denied making any such postings.
• Both employees were terminated, and advised that it was due to their making disrespectful, damaging, and derogatory comments on Facebook. Their Employer also said the comments were likely to damage their reputation and business interests. Further, the Employer felt that the relationship with both employees was irreparably damaged.

Why This Decision is Important

The postings to Facebook are extremely serious because they name the employer specifically and urge people to shop elsewhere, thus legitimately harming the employer’s business interests.

The number of Facebook friends that both employees had took away any expectation of privacy that they could claim for their posts.

There was no specific social media policy in place in this workplace.

Though employers generally cannot regulate an employees off-duty or social media conduct, there can be circumstances where it is appropriate for the employer to rely on that conduct in making a decision.

Case Details

Postings — motivated by anti-union animus — comments — posting — shop

Outcome

The dismissals were upheld with proper cause, and the arbitrator found that the employer had not breached the union code.

The employer’s dismissal of both employees over the inappropriate, disparaging, damaging Facebook posts was found to be reasonable.

Key Takeaways

• The comments made by AP and JT were aggressive, racist, and derogatory. They identified their employer and encouraged anyone who could see their posts (and anyone they might have shared them with) to shop elsewhere.
• The arbitrator distinguished these comments (made online, somewhat permanent) from those that are ‘regular shop-talk’ that happen at work.
• The employees “could not have a serious expectation of privacy” when publishing the comments online, because they had almost 500 friends between them, including other employees.
• The arbitrator did not find that the employer was motivated by anti-union sentiment to ‘find’ a reason to dismiss the employees.

References

Lougheed Imports Ltd (West Coast Mazda) v United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1518, 2010 CanLII 62482 (BC LRB)
https://canlii.ca/t/2d49w

PRIVACY NOTICE:  Any information you provide to our office — whether your personal information or employment/employer details — will be treated as strictly confidential and will not be disclosed to your employer or to any other third party. So, please be reassured that you can talk openly to our capable Intake Paralegals worry free. Fill out an Online Inquiry or call us now, your information will be in safe and helping hands.

The Legal Review Process by Taylor Janis Workplace Law

• Taylor Janis strives for high-quality, legally verified content.
• Content is meticulously researched and reviewed by our legal writers/proofers.
• Details are sourced from trusted legal sources like the Employment Standards Code.
• Each article is edited for accuracy, clarity, and relevance.
• If you find any incorrect information or discrepancies in legal facts, we kindly ask that you contact us with a correction to ensure accuracy.