(no subject)
11/1/05 06:48 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
minervasoloSo, you have a blog. You have a job. Sometimes, you vent about the job on the blog. Mildly insulting, mostly satirical.
So, you get fired.
I'm sort of outraged about this (because, seriously, is a word in the ear of an eleven year employee so hard?), but also kinda amused. Because, as someone else pointed out, Waterstone's have really shot themselves in the foot here. First, a friend of his takes it up, followed by Diversebooks, then he makes it onto boinbboing, shortly followed by The Register. Then it gets really unfortunate for Waterstone's, as there's a mention of it on the Timesonline, and the blogs of Neil Gaiman and sci fi author Charlie Stross.
The last and the first links are probably the most informative. It ads to my amusement that this guy, Joe, is apparently the one responsible for getting most of the authors to come for signings (inc Gaiman). So, fewer signings by heavy hitting authors, and a lot of bad press for Waterstones. Apparently it's also been mentioned on the BBC website, though I couldn't find it anywhere.
Depending on your contract, yes, you could be fired for negatively discussing your job. The issue here is whether (a) this is any different from chatting about it in a pub and (b) whether they have any control over what you do outside of work hours. What's interesting are Stross's assertions about the company, i.e. that "Waterstones has no company policy on employee weblogs".
Basically, it comes down to this: Be careful what you write. But also: be careful who you fire. People are pushing to see how far this can be spread (including me, here) and to see what action can be taken. If Joe wins recompensation then it wouldn't surprise me to see this in a few national newspapers, especailly with Gaiman's name linked to it.
So, you get fired.
I'm sort of outraged about this (because, seriously, is a word in the ear of an eleven year employee so hard?), but also kinda amused. Because, as someone else pointed out, Waterstone's have really shot themselves in the foot here. First, a friend of his takes it up, followed by Diversebooks, then he makes it onto boinbboing, shortly followed by The Register. Then it gets really unfortunate for Waterstone's, as there's a mention of it on the Timesonline, and the blogs of Neil Gaiman and sci fi author Charlie Stross.
The last and the first links are probably the most informative. It ads to my amusement that this guy, Joe, is apparently the one responsible for getting most of the authors to come for signings (inc Gaiman). So, fewer signings by heavy hitting authors, and a lot of bad press for Waterstones. Apparently it's also been mentioned on the BBC website, though I couldn't find it anywhere.
Depending on your contract, yes, you could be fired for negatively discussing your job. The issue here is whether (a) this is any different from chatting about it in a pub and (b) whether they have any control over what you do outside of work hours. What's interesting are Stross's assertions about the company, i.e. that "Waterstones has no company policy on employee weblogs".
Basically, it comes down to this: Be careful what you write. But also: be careful who you fire. People are pushing to see how far this can be spread (including me, here) and to see what action can be taken. If Joe wins recompensation then it wouldn't surprise me to see this in a few national newspapers, especailly with Gaiman's name linked to it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 11/1/05 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 12/1/05 01:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 12/1/05 08:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 12/1/05 10:30 am (UTC)