Although just bad practice in the United States, Minna Kotkin (Brooklyn) brings to my attention a case in Canada where the cavalier nature of a firing may lead to bad faith damages being awarded against the offending employer.
Carolyn Elefant of Legal Blog Watch Blog reports:
These days, Facebook isn’t just a go-to social media application. The Web site’s ubiquitous role in everyday life is also transforming it into a conduit for lawsuits. A few weeks back, I posed about the Australian court that allowed lawyers to serve a couple with lawsuit papers via Facebook. Now, the Calgary Herald reports that a Canadian spa used Facebook to fire an an employee, esthetician Crystal Bell.
Is it illlegal for an employer to fire a worker via Facebook, or just imprudent? Here in the United States where employment is entirely at will, there aren’t any laws, at least as far as I’m aware, that would protect an employee from being fired on Facebook. However, the Supreme Court of Canada, in a 1997 ruling known as the Wallace decision, set out how a firing, if done in a cavalier way, can result in “bad faith”damages in addition to normal severance pay. However, the ruling does not address the issue of whether being fired electronically equates with bad faith. Moreover, at least one lawyer whom Bell contacted advised that she didn’t have much of a case — she’d only been at the spa for two weeks.
Putting aside the merits of this specific case, the cause of action that comes to mind for me is the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress, since the focus is the manner in which the employee has been fired. Yet, I am not convinced that Facebook firings, which are certainly in bad taste and demonstrate a lack of tact, would probably not meet the standard of extreme outrageousness, which would require the action taken be: “utterly intolerable in a civilized society.”
Indeed, the ubiquity of Facebook and the amount of communications taking place over it might make such electronic terminations seem more conventional than outrageous.
A very interesting debate went on over at PrawfsBlog last month, as found here, here (in a post by Professor Esenberg), and here. It began with a discussion of how professors should address students in class (i.e., would I be called “Andrew” or “Mr. Golden”), and vice versa, but it has seemed to extend beyond that to how students are addressed outside of class and even what they are called once they graduate. Based on the posts and the bulk of comments I’ve seen over there, it seems the majority of the professors on that site tend to hold the opinion that it’s important for faculty to call their students “Mr. ___” or “Ms. ___”, be it to remain professional, show a level of respect, appreciate the formality of the law school process, etc. The level of importance indicated in their comments surprised me; I had no idea that this was something professors felt so strongly about!
