4 ms·
That depends, is the policy: a) As an employee, you are not allowed to make statements about internal matters on behalf of the company. b) As an employee, you
by themaninthedark 6y ago
That depends, is the policy:
a) As an employee, you are not allowed to make statements about internal matters on behalf of the company.
b) As an employee, you are not allowed to talk about internal matters outside the company.
If A, then I have no problem. Companies have PR teams and random employee #13554 might not have all the information about an issue.
If B, I have a huge problem as the first amendment is a thing that exists.
- aksss 6y agoYou limited B to internal matters, which generally means company confidential. Unless the matters concern legal violations (a different conversation about whistleblower regulation and protection), why on earth would you have “a huge problem” with confidentiality agreements and NDAs? Especially when you sign those agreements as a condition of employment?
- themaninthedark 6y agoWhen I said internal matters, I did not have any specific information in mind, just internal company matters. If engineer #34529, profiled liked to SpaceY says on Twitter that his group has lots of overtime. He could be fired in a case B situation. And yes, information like that could be coupled with other information to figure out what projects the company is working on. It is my belief that confidentiality agreements and NDAs, along with non-compete clauses are overbroad and expand beyond what companies are allowed to ask of their employees.
- throwawaysea 6y agoCompanies regularly fire people for expressing political opinions they don't agree with. I feel that speech should be protected, but if so, it should be protected across the board for all points of views, all ideologies, and all political positions. For instance, an employee who publicly criticizes Black Lives Matter should be able to do so without risking their job. Would you be OK with that?