General discussion


"Homer" gets fired for inappropriate web surfing

By JamesRL ·**0/national/nuclear_plant_firings

One hundred (out of 3000 total) employees fired for innapropriate internet usage.

Does anyone else here think this would not have happened on this scale, but for the recession.


This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -


by Shellbot In reply to "Homer" gets fired for in ...

10 or so..ya ok..but 100..
sounds like a great excuse to trim the numbers..

Collapse -

100 busted for bad web use???

by NotSoChiGuy In reply to Ya

That is either pretty bad management (Websense reporting, anyone) or a really good way to cover up a 3% workforce reduction.

Not sure how the unemployment system works in Canada, but if this were in Illinois, none of them would be able to legally claim unemployment (since they were termed with cause due to performance issues).

Collapse -

Same here

by JamesRL In reply to 100 busted for bad web us ...

Terminated for cause in Ontario means no eligibility for Employment Insurance.

Now generally to cover their butts, most employers in Ontario do provide a minimal severence even to those terminated for cause.


Collapse -

You would think

by JamesRL In reply to Ya

That if it were really a problem, they would let people go as they found abuse.

You can't convince me 100 people were found overnight, unless they just implemented web monitoring recently.


Collapse -

Not enough info.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to "Homer" gets fired for in ...

The article doesn't say if the employees affected were previously warned about their on-compliant Internet use, or if their activities were illegal in addition to violating company policy.

Collapse -

We may never know

by JamesRL In reply to Not enough info.

But having worked in the province, managed staff in the province, and having given speeches to hundreds of employees about internet monitoring in Ontario, I can hazard a guess.

This isn't at at will jurisdiction, and the labour laws are fairly middle of the road. I can't speak to the specific case of course, but in general, if there is a well known coporate policy, if the staff show a pattern of violation, that is sufficient grounds for termination for cause. They do not have to have a warning, though it helps to build a case. It doesn't have to be legal, as long as the corporate policy is well known and clear.


Collapse -

by the sound of it?

by jck In reply to "Homer" gets fired for in ...

Yes, I think it was driven primarily by that.

I think if they were making record profits, it wouldn't have been an issue.

Besides, I have often thought about getting a court order for traffic monitoring from my job for a 1 week period just as insurance.

I've seen half a dozen other employees surfing the web too, but I don't trust management to be fair. If they get a hair up their butt here, they are likely to just give you the boot.

It happened about a month ago. They axed someone for not working "their hours", when the people above them (who terminated them) are always taking extended lunches, running errands, etc., on work time.

Scary stuff.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Related Discussions

Related Forums