Click here to follow STATter911.com on Facebook (hit “like”)
According to the Baltimore Sun’s Kevin Rector a new policy covering social media and the Internet for Baltimore City firefighters bans wesbites like the one above, for Engine 8 and Truck 10. But, so far, that’s not the part of the policy that is proving controversial:
Under the policy, department personnel can be reprimanded for anything they write online about their jobs that doesn’t adhere to conduct rules, which require “good judgment” and “courtesy and respect to the public and to fellow employees.” The policy also restricts them from sharing information about fire scenes.
Fire Chief James S. Clack said the department crafted the policy to protect firefighters from getting into trouble for sharing sensitive information.
But union leaders called the policy too broad and said the department created it unilaterally after negotiations with union attorneys broke down last month. Social media and free-speech advocates balked at the scope of the policy and questioned its legality.
Bradley Shear, a Bethesda attorney who has advised state legislators in Annapolis on social media policy, said the new provisions are “troubling” and potentially unconstitutional.
“I think the policy is clearly suspect,” Shear said. “It’s over-broad, it’s retroactive, and I think they need to go back to the drawing board.”
Read entire article from The Baltimore Sun
Chief Clack told The Sun that while attorneys for the City threw in a lot of things, ”I’m going to be most interested in people when they’re working”,
The policy, like many these days, brings up as many questions as it answers. One thing that is banned is ”the real-time public disclosure of locations of deployed units, assets or personnel or any other real-time information from an incident scene.” Until earlier this year, IAFF Local 734 was using Baltimore City firefighters to provide such information to the public much as IAFF Local 36 in Washington, DC is doing currently. Could a fire department legally ban such union activity?
As you heard Curt Varone discuss with me in our IAFC webinar 10-days-ago, a social media policy is extremely important, but striking that right balance in today’s environment while this is all evolving, will prove to be challenging.
Also on STATter911 …
- Having a social media policy doesn’t mean you’re a socialist. That & other useful info from Varone & Statter’s free SM webinar. – October 22, 2012
- Baltimore City announces closing of Trucks 10 & 15 & Squad 11. Other companies moving. End of rotating closures. – April 6, 2012
- Fells Point fallout: With closings looming Baltimore firefighter comments about two hatters coming into city during five-alarm fire makes news. – June 15, 2012
- Social media & the fire service from people who get it. Let Chief Bill Boyd guide you & your department into a brave new world. – August 12, 2012
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Couple of things. #1, all FD operations are public information, including types of calls and units responding. #2 and perhaps the biggest, is that there isn’t two separate Bill of Rights. If the city wants to institute this policy, does it also prevent the local news from reporting? My guess is that this action by the city is intended to keep the union ask quiet as they can about the staffing & station closure issues.
Sorry, should be “as ” not “ask”
How unfortunate. Shame on Chief Clack and the rest of the Baltimore bean counters for not understanding the HUGE benefits of these web sites.
So much for “Constitutional Rights” and free speech…..I can see a lot of phony names on these social websites now….
time to co opt the hitler rant video for this subject
This doesn’t bode well for someone who straddles the line between Department employee and blog aggregate contributor. Regardless of the perceived unconstitutionality of the bans (the implementation of which I wholeheartedly disagree with), I think it cannot be forgotten that many of these new policies* are the result of the lowest common denominators of our coworkers who are using Facebook to muck it up for the rest of us.
* it’s international, too. High Performance EMS reported yesterday that Winnipeg banned cell phones for firefighters and paramedics.
Edit: perhaps “lowest common denominators” was a bit rough. I should, after all, continue to practice good judgement, and express courtesy and respect to the public and to fellow employees.
i think what you are trying to say is “one person sh#%s their pants and everyone wears a diaper”
This is really disturbing and in my opinion infrnging on our constitutional rights. I understand the need for a social media policy. In this day and age of instant information, that is a necessity. But really, keep it simple and if one of your employees posts or communicates something inappropriate, deal with it on an individual case by case basis. I feel like we have reverted to grade school where the entire class is punished for the actions of one student. Where do they get some of these administrators?! And really, this was initiated after complaints about the closure of fire stations? Doesn’t pass the smell test Chief. And what exactly is the issue with individual companies having their own web page? Let’s just kill all of the pride associated with the fire service.
Whatever happened to Freedom of Speech?
THANK GOD the policy does not prevent thought. god knows we dont want to be talking about what goes on at a fire
did LRB write it?
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment does not apply to speech for public employees when they speak as employees about job-related matters of public concern. See Supreme Court decision “Garcetti v. Ceballos”
Folks, many of you that are using the 1st Amendment as an argument fail to grasp the fact that gov’t can not restrict the private citizens right to free speech. (Even though they have in many ways. Anyone yell fire in a theatre? Say bomb in an airport? Threaten the president?) So to use that reasoning is false. Employers can and do “violate” certain parts of the Constitution, legally. The gov’t does in certain ways as well.
Any of you folks try to bear arms while at work?
Are you allowed to give out info to the media any time and whenever? Or do you have a PIO or someone designated by the chief to do so?
Don’t get me wrong, some\most of this policy is stupid. But not necessarily unconstitutional.
As we have pointed out here many times Mark, anyone in public safety who thinks what they post in their off duty time and their job are definately going to be protected under the first amendment just isn’t paying attention to what’s been going on and the stories from around the country I have been sharing with you. The best answer right now is maybe, maybe not.
If you can’t afford to be out of work while what may be a lengthy and expensive battle is being fought as you try to get your job back, you might want to be very careful. There is still a lot involving social media and the Internet that has not been made all that clear in the courts. Don’t take my word, check out FireLawBlog.com and watch what Curt Varone is posting daily. He’s someone who is a firefighter and a lawyer and has made social media, the Internet and digital media as it all relates to public safety a speciality.
Statter
Dave & All – the IAFF released ( a few years back, if I’m not mistaken) a “primer” for Locals dealing with this issue – the internet, social media, the First Amendment, and public safety employees. While the lines aren’t completely gray, they aren’t clearly drawn either. It will be interesting to see what the inevitable court battle draws down to on this issue. I know the individuals in Baltimore who were running their very effective social media accounts – they were dedicated and intelligent individuals. My hats off to them, and to everyone else who work to keep the public informed, especially in the realm of public safety – were it not for the constant reporting with various forms of media, many departments would be suffering even more than they are now.
When did we become a communist country…. I must have been sleeping… .Strike Da Box! K
It is a shame to see something like this. Instead of working with the individual houses and helping them to “do it the right way” to use their sites as good public relations tools, a policy like this comes out. I fear that the public perception will be that either the department has something to hide or that they are lazy and are taking the easy way out approach that by not allowing the sites now they can ignore the issues.
A few years ago after a firefighter LODD incident, the previous BCFD chief went on a safety kick. When BCFD members then started posting photos of their apparatus deficiencies, the BCFD chief banned all photography by members on duty. Basically, the same type of situation as the reaction was to hide facts about the department which those in power didn’t want the public to see.
As for the part regarding them being able to go after members for things they have done in the past, that will be a hard one to enforce unless they want to have a sure loss in a lawsuit. The US Constitution bans ‘ex post facto’ laws, which is what that part of the regulation creates. This is a case where the ACLU would have a field day with the City of Baltimore.
Eventually the issue of social media is going to start to get ruled on by federal courts, and eventually the Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see how they rule. Unfortunately, until the courts start ruling on these issues in relations to employees (especially public employees), we are going to see these types of situations.
As much as I don’t agree with the striking down of the individual websites, and your thoughts on social media, the bottom line is: you lose.
They are your employer. Plain and simple. Nothing says you must work for them. They are simply saying, if you continue, you can find employment elsewhere.
Many hospitals in the region I live have mandated flu vaccines. It may sound silly to some, but to others, it’s an invasion to their bodies. It’s also very simple: get the vaccine and remain employed, or don’t. They consider it your “voluntary resignation”.
It’s a losing battle. Pick a better fight. You won’t win this one. Trust me.
Dearest Dave,
My secret is safe with you but I could not resist….
Dave Statter hit the nail right on the head- sometimes it does not pay to be a pioneer, especially if someone else depends on you for their daily meals.
Of course all this talk of first amendment rights could easily be framed against some sort of national conspiracy that aims to undermine and erode individual rights in the name of some sort of post Orwellian future state of mindlessly numb firemen. But the obverse is also likely; that the potential for harm, for hateful or simply insentive messages and statements to do real and present damage to an organization almost forces their hands on such matters.
Who knows for sure whether it was the chicken or the egg in this case? Chief Clack has a duty to protect the sanctity of his organization. Whether or not he overstepped his boundaries is unclear but there is a message: If you fail to censor yourself society-whatever form that takes- will likely censor you herself.
Consider this matter against the other comments, postings, blogs, and other materials that allow a single person access to thousands of readers, a capability that offers, in essence, a voice to those who would otherwise only be heard at the kitchen table. The difference between the internet and the kitchen table is that you, the fireman, already know the rules, already know the limits, can look around the table and know what will be acceptable to your group. Get on the internet and say the same things and well the game changes.
Clickity Clack he won’t turn back until a judge says so
But along the way, be careful what you say, or you may be the one to go
And you will plead your case as the years go by to many a judge and court
but in the end the question my friend, will be, was it worth it
Quixote, he rode on a broken horse chasing windmill shadows
And as I bid adieu I offer he, like you,had trouble focusing on what matters.
Simplest of simple solutions. Anonymity, want to express your feelings and opinions about your department create a anonymous facebook or twitter or blog, etc.. How can they punish someone they cant find.
Yep we all know none of that social media stuff is useful. Just look at the past week with all the useless information during the storm…oh wait.
Ineffective leadership ends up with policies like this. @SSG, I have to disagree about the kitchen table analogy. Ask the rookie who opens his mouth the wrong way. He will learn the right way to do it, but not before the damage is done. Things like that have been know to stick with people for their career. The difference in the kitchen is that the audience is not public and is subject to different rules as a workplace.
Some people don’t always pick up on the same social cues as others. Again it comes down to knowing how to deal with people when in a position of leadership (both management and union), and it is frequently one of the last considerations when it comes to promotion.
As Jason just pointed out, the value of POSITIVE social media applications has very recently been pointed out by our brothers at FDNY, among others.
It’s a shame when the opportunity for LEADERship is fupped duck by the supposed leadership in a situation like this. Yes, there would still be blips in the works, but with support and guidance from both management & union, the operation of such sites could be a huge help, both in routine day to day information sharing, and in emergency situations.
FD leadership, both big and small, always has options of which path to use in their management style. It’s always a shame to see another Chief choose the DC, Detroit, Philly path.