Employers - Are You Aware of the Potential Pitfalls in Using the Internet and Social Networking Sites?

As most employers are aware, the use of social networking sites such as Google, Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter is on the rise as both employees and employers utilize these sites for business and personal purposes. Employers must be aware of the pitfalls associated with using social networking sites, however, to avoid potentially expensive and time-consuming litigation. The following highlights the most common risk areas associated with social networking sites.

Using Social Networking Sites to “Google” Applicants

While many hiring managers “Google” applicants to uncover useful information, they overlook the potential legal problems that arise when an employer learns personal information about an applicant that it would be prohibited from obtaining through traditional sources pursuant to applicable state and federal law. For instance, while the law prohibits an employer from asking an applicant his/her age, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, etc. during a conventional application/interview process, the employer may unwittingly learn this information simply by doing a quick “Google” search. Once an employer has such information, it may face discrimination claims from applicants who are not hired and contend that the company’s decision was based on some illicit factor. Similarly, applicants may allege discrimination where the employer only conducts Google searches on some applicants (for example, minorities), and not others, or holds certain groups to a higher standard than others when viewing and considering information on social media sites. In using such sites, employers must also comply with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and related state laws.

To reduce risk in this area, employers are well-advised to prepare and distribute a comprehensive Internet background search policy and train supervisors in this area. In addition, employers may have a third-party or “screened” employee conduct any Internet background checks and send only information relevant to the employment search to the company’s hiring decisionmakers.

Providing LinkedIn Recommendations

The provision of LinkedIn recommendations is another area in which employers may potentially run into trouble. Unfortunately, employers may only realize the danger of a LinkedIn recommendation in a subsequent employment discrimination lawsuit. For instance, an employee who is terminated for performance reasons and claims his/her discharge is discriminatory may argue that his/her performance was not substandard, and may point to a LinkedIn recommendation provided by his/her supervisor as proof that he/she was performing satisfactorily.

Review of Employees’ Private Emails and Chat Rooms

Another area in which employers are overreaching is in their review of employees’ private emails and/or review of employees’ posts in private chat rooms. In two recent cases, courts have favored employees’ privacy rights in their Web-based email accounts and private chat rooms, and held that employers violated these rights by their unauthorized review of such emails/posts. In Stengart vs. Loving Care Agency, 408 N.J. Super. 54 (App. Div. 2009), about which we recently posted, New Jersey’s Appellate Division held that Loving Care violated the attorney-client privilege by viewing private Web-based emails between Stengart and her attorney even though the emails were drafted on the Company’s computer and Loving Care’s email policy made clear, at least in some areas, that Stengart had no privacy interest in such emails. The New Jersey Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case.

In Pietrylo v. Hillstone Restaurant Group, 2008 WL 6085437 (D.N.J. 2008), a Newark jury held that the employer, Houston’s Restaurant, violated the federal Stored Communications Act and the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, by secretly monitoring employees’ postings on a private password-protected Internet chat room. The Court affirmed the jury’s finding.

Accordingly, these cases make clear that an employer’s review of an employee’s private communications is not unlimited and employers must be very cautious about reviewing private emails. To reduce risk in this area, employers should clearly address employees’ expectations as to the privacy of their use of Company-provided technology and properly draft and communicate email, Internet, blogging and social media policies. Finally, employers should use great caution and consult counsel before entering an employee’s password-protected site or email account.

ARRA COBRA Subsidy Set to End As of December 31, 2009

As employers who have experienced employee terminations within the past fifteen (15) months are aware, the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) provides a COBRA premium subsidy of 65% for qualified beneficiaries who suffer an “involuntary termination” between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009 and who are eligible for COBRA within the same time period and elect such continuation coverage.  The question has arisen whether employees who are terminated in December 2009 and are set to begin COBRA on January 1, 2010 are eligible for this subsidy.

Pursuant to IRS and DOL guidance, the answer is no. In fact, “both the involuntary termination and eligibility for COBRA continuation coverage must occur during September 1, 2008 through December 31, 2009.” See IRS Notice 2009-27,Q/A 13114.  Because COBRA eligibility only begins after an individual ceases to be an active employee, an employee who ceases to be an employee in December 2009 and is first eligible to begin COBRA coverage on January 1, 2010 will not be entitled to the subsidy. See Id.  Accordingly, if the employee and his/her dependents are covered through December 31, 2009, they will not technically become eligible for COBRA until January 2010 and, therefore, will fall outside the ARRA subsidy program.  Employers should be clear on this guidance so that they may properly advise employees and not inadvertently promise anyone a subsidy in 2010.

Employers should also note that Congress is considering certain bills that might extend the COBRA premium subsidy to June 30, 2010.  We intend to keep readers updated on the status of such proposed legislation in future blog posts.

Employers Must Post The New "EEO Is The Law" Poster

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") has released a new mandatory "EEO Is The Law" poster, which is required to be posted by employers as of November 21, 2009.  Employers can either download and post a supplement alongside the existing September 2002 EEOC poster or replace the older poster with the new one.  The new poster and supplement can be downloaded at http://www1.eeoc.gov/employers/poster.cfm. The November 2009 poster incorporates the 2008 amendments to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") as well as the recent amendments to the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 ("GINA"), which also became effective on November 21, 2009.