LY #83: Social Media and Freedom of Speech or Fired, Part Deux

Our college President, Jim Middleton, has always been friendly to me.  I think he's a nice guy.  During the time that I was a department chair he supported me in at least two difficult situations, one in which I made a correct judgement call and was attacked for it and a second in which my decisions were poor but accepted as a not unusual error.  

I would not, therefore, be like the faculty members at College of Marin who "submitted a resolution with a laundry list of complaints about Middleton" according to a report by Nancy Isles Nation, in the Marin Independent Journal (March 28, 2003 Marin section).  These complaints involved harshly stated criticisms of financial decision making at a time of budget meltdown (which is just about any old time in California since Howard Jarvis rocked the tax-boat in 1978).  Five months later, a report by an independent firm called ThoughtBridge found that the problems at the College of Marin predated the coming Middleton as they noted that  "the institution lacks a common vision, leadership, communication and a process to connect parts of the institution as one, cohesive organization." (Marin Independent Journal, August 11, 2003)   The consultants knew that it takes a village to mess up a village.  It's never appropriate to find one person responsible for all the good or ill that occurs within a large organization.

So as people talk about the current dysfunction and chaos in COCC's management, they are wrong if they waggle their pointer fingers at any one individual or cause.  There's guilt to go around, including some settling with those of us oldsters who got tired of it and pulled back into our shells.

But that's not what I wanted to talk about.  I offer the information above merely as a pretext for

wondering, if I were in Kansas right now and writing about a college president, could I be terminated? With prejudice?  According to the new social media policy, my tenure status would not be all that potent a shield if it looked like I was doing anything that impaired the ability of my leader to lead or had a "detrimental impact on close working relationships."  Does what I'm saying impact the image of the college?  Does it hurt the bottom line?

Well, considering that on a good day ten people read this palaver I provide, probably not.  BUT, an argument could be made . . . If I lived in Kansas.

Fortunately, I don't.  Nor do I think it's the job of every worker to be nice and polite about his or her workplace in public utterances, not while the First Amendment is in operation.  And while the business of America may be business, the business of its academic institutions should be something else -- the creation of citizens, the training of workers and/or the creation of new knowledge, depending on the vision and goals of the particular school. 


Below find the Full Text of the new Social Media policy of the Kansas Board of Regents:

The chief executive officer of a state university has the authority to suspend, dismiss or terminate from employment any faculty or staff member who makes improper use of social media.  "Social media" means any facility for online publication and commentary, including but not limited to blogs, wikis, and social networking sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Flickr, and YouTube.  "Improper use of social media" means making a communication through social media that:

i.  directly incites violence or other immediate breach of the peace;

ii.  when made pursuant to (i.e. in furtherance of) the employee's official duties, is contrary to the best interest of the university;

iii.  discloses without authority any confidential student information, protected health care information, personnel records, personal financial information, or confidential research data; or
iv.  subject to the balancing analysis required by the following paragraph, impairs discipline by superiors or harmony among co-workers, has a detrimental impact on close working relationships for which personal loyalty and confidence are necessary, impedes the performance of the speaker's official duties, interferes with the regular operation of the university, or otherwise adversely affects the university's ability to efficiently provide services.

In determining whether the employee's communication constitutes an improper use of social media under paragraph (iv), the chief executive officer shall balance the interest of the university in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees against the employee's right as a citizen to speak on matters of public concern, and may consider the employee's position within the university and whether the employee used or publicized the university name, brands, website, official title or school/department/college or otherwise created the appearance of the communication being endorsed, approved or connected to the university in a manner that discredits the university.  The chief executive officer may also consider whether the communication was made during the employee's working hours or the communication was transmitted utilizing university systems or equipment.  This policy on improper use of social media shall apply prospectively from its date of adoption by the Kansas Board of Regents.