good rule of thumb for tweeting - always be in line with company mission. He could have worded that differently and probably not had a problem. Something along the lines of "not sure how i feel about these new CPK uniforms - any thoughts?" along with a picture. Leave it up to others to vent or explain.
erik25
· 2 months ago
He had every right to say what he did.
CPK had every right to fire his dumb ass!
Kelly Gorski
· 2 months ago
If I was an employer and my employee said/tweeted/emailed/whatever something like that, he/she would be fired in no time. He wasn't getting paid to degrade his employer in public (or private for that matter). He can go earn his money somewhere else.
Manjak
· 2 months ago
Spot on. Couldn't agree more.
Angela
· 2 months ago
Or.........you could simply not react to an admittedly less-than-sophisticated comment with the iron hand of doom. You could actually be the kind of boss that is not incredibly anal about harmless employee speech or about the form that potential feedback comes in. You might be willing to take a few seconds of effort to see if a particular employee has a valid grievance or if your new uniforms are in fact considered lame shit by most people on your staff.
Just sayin'
JP
· 2 months ago
I think its lame that if a consumer complains companies rush to their aid. If an employee complains they fire them.
Rachel Kay
· 2 months ago
It surprises me how many people feel that CPK is in the wrong for firing this guy. What he did was incredibly unprofessional and had he said the same thing directly to his superiors he probably would have netted the same result, as it seems like a clear case of insubordination. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech or his right to protest his uniform. If he was unhappy he could have easily called or written to his manager or the HR department. Instead he choose to crudely and publicly call them out over a social network. As an employee of the company he is a brand representative, and when his behavior reflects poorly on the brand he doesn't get to work there anymore. We are in a lot of trouble if it's now appropriate to cuss out our employers as long as it's through social media. Seems like a no brainer.
MichaelADeBose
· 2 months ago
A warning or suspension would have been far more appropriate. Every employee contrary to popular belief is not a brand representative of the company. Those paid to represent the brand of the company are the brand representatives of the company. When he is on the clock, he represents the company, though not the brand. Brands are unique things and differentiate one business from another. Yet all businesses expect employees to be professional and courteous, thus that experience can't be branded or trademarked. Did he inappropriately communicate clearly. Are there better ways to say what he said, clearly. Did CPK have other options besides firing him, clearly. This of course is why, CPK's stated policy in regards to social media is the first consideration above all else, given that policy removes emotion from the equation and dictates beforehand potential repercussions. If they do not have a written policy that has been distributed and signed by employees, they are on shaky legal ground regardless what management may feel. Conversely, if they have a written policy that has completed all policy steps, which Tim previously understood and signed, obviously the onus of his actions shifts to Tim. In that you speak of brand, what would CPK's media capital be in your eyes if you found that they as a corporation were out on Twitter, tweeting away but had no written policy? If you put forth that as a mere employee, he's a brand representative, then I'm sure you accept that the same goes for the CEOs and management of CPK even morso, who are being watched now by their peers as they made a previously unknown event quite public. It will be interesting to see how prepared they were for this eventuality. Maybe one can brand PREPARED.
jimgoldstein
· 2 months ago
Does anyone know if CPK has a communication policy covering Social Media? This is the keystone to this whole debate. If CPK doesn't have their act together to educate their employees about Social Media, its impact on business and the manner that is deemed acceptable as it relates to talking about their business then they over reacted and it's their fault. Ultimately his behavior was unprofessional and if they did have a communication policy covering acceptable social media use as it relates to the CPK then they acted with in their right... as noted in my earlier comment. Personally it would seem they over reacted not weighing the pros and cons of firing him.
No longer do companies control their brand outright and this is proof.
Ruth Weal
· 2 months ago
Surely though there is a wider issue around whether companies have a right to dictate how you speak about them on your own time. After all, there is no way they can regulate how you would speak about them at a party to friends, or in private, so why should they be able to do it online? They may not like that you speak ill of them, but you are not required to like your employer and I would venture that there are many people who don't.
I do believe that when you work for a company you are it's representative and a reflection of it's brand, but the onus has to be on the company to ensure that you have the level of engagement with your employees that they feel pride and responsibility to their employer. This also goes with ensuring you employ the right people, with the right attitudes that reflect your company values wherever possible.
Companies need to recognise that employees don't generally live to work, they work to live and many people are disengaged with management and policy because they don't have any sense of personal responsibility and are not properly communicated to or feel the value of their contribution.
CPK has materially damaged it's brand by responding to such a silly statement in such a strong and public way. Perhaps they should be reviewing their employee engagement and communication methods and policies rather than punishing their employee's truthful (if a little vitriolic) opinions.
Ruth Weal
· 2 months ago
I would agree that his actions were wrong, whether they required an instance of firing I would disagree. Perhaps he has caused trouble before and this was the cherry on the pie, but I think in isolation it warranted perhaps a warning, but not firing.
In the end though CPK was short sighted and has garnered much more bad publicity. Had they played at Timothy's game and responded in less of a knee jerk manner and perhaps stated there reasons for the uniform change they might have come out a lot more favourably than they have done.
Robert
· 2 months ago
Voicing concerns about a company is perfectly fine. However, I don't think swearing is appropriate (or smart) when referring to your own company.
Ash
· 2 months ago
Just make what you do on social media sites private, don't add your bosses as friends or followers, and don't direct a derogatory tweet at your own company (@calpizzakitchen). Come on. People need to use their freaking brains.
smi23le
· 2 months ago
He wasn't fired for "expressing discontent about a uniform change"... he was fired for doing so in a public space where customers of @calpizzakitchen could see it...
LVK
· 2 months ago
I completely agree. It is not that he expressed discontent, but that he did not go through the proper channels to do so. The same thing happened at a company I was working for. It is not about the issue, it's about how he handled it. Had he gone to his manager to express himself, he probably would not be in this situation.
alanna1403
· 2 months ago
It seems silly to fire someone for something they said about a uniform change. If it had been demeaning to the brand image or the company's assets then it would be more understandable, but plenty of people are unhappy with the uniform they wear to work.
Plus I think that employers checking up on a member of staff's social networking habits is unfair. What that person decides to do outside of work and say to people outside of work should have nothing to do with their employer.
kevinarth
· 2 months ago
in this day and age, your public life is public and employers will monitor that stuff. if you say something derogatory, you'll hear about it. This is no different than him standing in front of the store and screaming "CPK Sucks and I hate the new uniform." That's clearly an offense that could warrant disciplinary action.
Frankly, no one cares if the new uniform compliments his complexion (or whatever he said). You wanna work there, you wear the uniform. You don't like it, quit. You badmouth the company, the hammer may come down on you.
thelatemrshunt
· 2 months ago
alanna1403 "What that person decides to do outside of work and say to people outside of work should have nothing to do with their employer."
Alanna, I totally disagree with this. What you post when social networking is a representation of your general character, and your employer has every right to know what type of person is working for him/her, or if they should even hire you. Your posts exhibit the 'real you' and the values, or lack of, that you embrace and choose to live by.
Susan
· 2 months ago
Assuming the short article hear hasn't left out any important facts, it seems really excessive to fire someone for simply saying they think their uniform is lame. I can't imagine anyone being fired for just for saying such a thing on the job. It's not an outrageous opinion. It's true that service workers shouldn't swear when customers are around to here, but, that seems like something a supervisor could just calmly mention to the employee, and only fire them if they refused to improve their conduct. It seems that someone in a position of authority in this case thinks that an employee who puts *anything* the least bit non-complementary on Twitter should be fired for the offense, which strikes me as extreme. Moreover, the company went out of their way to determine the identity of a poster who was posting semi-anonymously. I don't think that should be done *at all* when all the guy did was say "I don't like my new uniform." That's an attempt to stifle even the most innocuous criticisms.
Susan
· 2 months ago
wish I could edit: swapped "hear" and "here."
Mike Kornacki
· 2 months ago
California Pizza Kitchen did him a favor. He obviously had no real attachment or affinity to working for them, and is not looking for his job back after the fact. Why would they want someone like that working for them anyway. It wasn't a right fit for the Employer or Employee. They both are better off.
Joanne Glasspoole
· 2 months ago
If the pizza joint used Twitter the way successful companies are using Twitter, the owner would have talked to the young man to find out why he disapproved of the new uniforms. Chances are pretty good, if he thinks they suck, others feel the same way. It's all about image. Companies need to educate employees on what is acceptable (Social Media Etiquette). Companies also need to add a new policy about "social media etiquette" to their Employee Manual.
Kenya
· 2 months ago
He sent the tweet to California Pizza Kitchen's corporate Twitter account (@calpizzakitchen). They are an international chain so I doubt that anyone is going to sit down with him. It is likely that his supervisors and managers all got into trouble for his tweet.
Craig Luecke
· 2 months ago
I find it disturbing that the current votes says he should not have been fired. He posted something under the company name.
Matt Skallerud
· 2 months ago
Unfortunately this video is now private
Alan Belniak
· 2 months ago
If this employee said the same comment to the employers face, would that have gotten him fired? Maybe not, but pretty close. What if that same employee announced his feelings about black button-down shirts with a bullhirn, walking through the dining room? Probably. Though not a direct analogy, it's close: the reach of social media is broad. If he wanted to vent, why not create another Twitter profile, lock it down, and only invite friends?
jimgoldstein
· 2 months ago
Here's a thought... What people lose sight of is that when you sign on as an employee you often sign paperwork agreeing to a code of conduct. That covers in person interaction and online interaction. If you agree to those terms then you'll be held accountable. I find it surprising that people feel he's a victim. Were I making the call I'd have handled it differently. Clearly those making the decision on this didn't understand the long term implications of their old school approach. I don't agree with it, but that was their decision to make. For all I know this guy took a job 1 day a week and did this just to get attention to his hip-hop CD. Not likely but it's possible.
Doc Emmit Brown
· 2 months ago
As a consumer of pizza I will no longer patronize CPK stores and I will encourage my network of friends and family to do the same.
The way CPK corporate have acted in this instance is pathetic and disgraceful. They turned a minor instance into major one, whether you agree with CPK or not, the real issue is: Whats the big f**#ing deal CPK? Had they left well enough alone, they would have minimized the impact of this employees criticism, instead they maximized exposure by firing him. Surprise, he turned to social media to vent his frustration. How stupid is this company?
Therefore, I will no longer buy CPK products or eat at CPK restaurants, because its obvious that CPK is the type of company that treats their employees like sh*t, and wastes everybody's time and money. Bravo CPK corporate, Bravo.
It would seem he references a communication policy was brought up as justification for his dismissal. Posting online is forever... this incident will follow him around if he is looking for meaningful employment in any corporation. I'm all for free speech, but you have to be smart and think long-term with these things. I hope for his sake he is able to leverage his temporary notoriety to do something outside of the corporate world. Everyone's dirt is only a Google search away these days.
Craig Luecke
· 2 months ago
I wish we knew the ages of those who are sticking up for the employee in this. My guess is that the money demographic who is employed 40+ hours week and works for a company with a national reputation sides with the company on this issue. The demo of 25 and under who does not work full time or is unemployed will most likely side with the employee.
Brent
· 2 months ago
Craig, I'm 40, work full time 40+ hrs a week for an international company. And ironically, I find myself siding with the employee in this case. Saying his new uniform sucked publicly is NOT grounds for being fired no more so than if I said wearing business suits to my office is friggin stupid (which fortunately I don't have to because I HATE business suits).
And I agree with what others are saying to a certain extent. Essentially what I do in my free time off the clock is my business. What I wear, where I go, who I hang out with, and what I say even in a public place is my business not my employers. Of course there's a thin line in regards to libel. If I complain about a coworker while out in a public restaurant with friends though is still my business. Again its really a very fine line based on whats being said. If I flat out said in public that my company is shitty, pays like crap, and is filled with assholes (which it isn't any of those again thankfully - well not entirely on the last one, but every job/office has their assholes and its our responsibility to come in and work with them professionally despite it).
Clearly CPK overreacted. I agree with what others are saying, they should have addressed the issue of the uniform publicly.
nita12
· 2 months ago
Although your thoughts on demo may not be completely right as I'm 21 and totally side with CPK, I agree with you completely on everything else you've posted. Just because CPK doesn't have a social media policy (I mean, come on, what company does?) doesn't mean that what you do outside of work has nothing to do with work. When you have a Facebook account and Twitter and whatever else is out there, it's public!! Lots of employers these days are checking these things and for many companies, it may be the deciding factor. What you post can be seen by millions of people...that is unless you set everything to private. Don't be so fuckin retarded and think that no one is going to read it.
I also think that those of you who said that CPK should promote him is absolutely absurd! We all know that a lot of us have friends on Facebook or whatever that we don't talk to or are constantly stalking online. For someone that would say things like that about a company he represented for, well, let's just say I sure as hell wouldn't want him working for me!
He was being totally selfish and ignorant about the uniforms. Fine if it's his opinion, but because black would make his frame look even smaller?!?! Seriously?? Work out or something then! Stop wasting time making these ridiculous videos and do something about it. What is complaining about the uniforms going to do? Haha, except get you fired in which you now have no job??
Not to mention a detail that maybe not many people have thought about...perhaps if he was a valuable asset to his restaurant and was a great waiter, maybe they wouldn't have fired him? Maybe this Tweet thing was the last straw...?
Kenya
· 2 months ago
Are we seriously claiming that this guy was fired because of Twitter? This was not some tweet where he is just expressing his opinion about his job. This isn't even an example of the company looking for dirt on employees. He saw fit to send the tweet to his employer's corporate Twitter account (@calpizzakitchen). He specifically sent the message to them. What did he think was going to happen? If he mailed a letter to corporate expressing the same sentiment would we blame the Postal Service? If he called would be blame the phone company? It's likely that he thought that because he used an alias that he wouldn't get caught. Now, it looks like he's trying to milk it to be internet famous.
jimgoldstein
· 2 months ago
Seems to be this is a pretty straight forward situation:
If the company had a well established communication policy covering social media use and he breached it then yes he should have been fired.
If the company did not yet have a communication policy covering social media then he should not have been fired, but reprimanded. The onus is on every company to establish professional norms expected through social media use by it's employees. This should be covered on the first day of employment.
another ex-cpk worker
· 2 months ago
They don't. The rule is that employees can't do anything unbecoming while in uniform or take pictures or cell videos inside the building, so unless they've seriously overhauled the code of conduct in the five weeks since I stopped working there, there was no policy about talking about the company on twitter, facebook, or myspace.
jimgoldstein
· 2 months ago
If they didn't have a policy communicated to their employees about social media then in my opinion they certainly were not in a position to fire him for his Tweet. They should have reprimanded him. That being said California is an at-will employer. At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it's not illegal. Thanks for the reply.
Mike L
· 2 months ago
Maybe this one was part of it, too: http://twitter.com/Traphik/statuses/3771478675 (Don't want to paste and submit in while on my work network, because I don't want to end up like Traphik.)
kevinarth
· 2 months ago
Hard to know. We only know his side of the story. He says he tweeted twice and that was it. If that's the truth, then I think CPK overreacted and he should have just gotten a warning.
Maybe this kid is a troublemaker. Maybe his employement jacket is filled with disciplinary action for being late for work or missing days, or other belligerent outbursts that weren't Twitter. We just don't know because I don't think we know the whole story.
corecorina
· 2 months ago
I don't see how levying an opinion outside of your workplace is ground for firing... particularly when the employee has no foreseeable influence in the company policy.
If a company can't stand in the face of such a tepid comment, I'd have to ask what they are so insecure about? Maybe black button ups are THE LAMEST SHIT EVER? :)
advocatus
· 2 months ago
He made his comment in a way that directly involved his employer. If he has simply said, "I hate this new uniform at work, it sucks" with no reference to a specific company any/or store location, it wouldn't of been a problem.
Susan
· 2 months ago
I can't look at the video. When I try to play, I get a message saying it's private
Demonicpagan
· 2 months ago
Can't view the video as it is now a private video. Must be a friend of his to view it.
Bran
· 2 months ago
First, I can't view the video you posted because it's private.
I believe that CPK has the right to monitor Twitter for comments about them from anyone I believe that an employee should be held to a completely different standard for what they say about the company they work for. I believe that the firing of that employee is between him and CPK.
MY OPINION is that based on what I read CPK had good reason to fire him.
Bryan
Kichgai Mentat
· 2 months ago
Why should employees be held to a different standard when talking about the company they work for? So long as an employee doesn't do such a thing in an official capacity (while working, or claiming to be an official representative of the company) it doesn't seem like it's a very big deal. Lots of people complain about their jobs in public. Does that mean if I worked for Starbucks, and while I was out with friends (say at a restaurant or some other place that isn't related to Starbucks), and I mentioned the new Starbucks coffee drink was a big disappointment, and my manager happened to be there to hear my comment, and fired me the next time I clocked in, is that alright?
From what I can tell in the article (since the video has gone private) the employee wasn't excessively rude or using horrible language, nor was he slandering the company.
Lots of employees complain about their uniforms. I knew someone who worked for, I think it was Caribou Coffee at the time, and the company had just issued new aprons with ridiculously small pockets. Many people had mentioned how silly the new uniforms were because the pockets were totally useless. None of them got fired. In my opinion, No one really would have known about this man's opinion about CPK's uniforms. But CPK drew attention to it, and now they've got a bigger problem.
There exists a problem now where companies can easily monitor their employees while off-hours, and the line between on-the-clock and off-the-clock blurs. I seem to remember there was an employee of some company (I think he was a truck driver or something) who was photographed in drag. The people involved didn't make too big a deal over it, and the guy was fired for it. He did this, however, in his off hours. He never brought it up at work, and yet his private life, what he did on his own time, when he was not acting in any way as a representative of his employer, got him fired.
I'm sorry, but when I'm off the clock, what I do is my business. I have a private life, and my employer does not have the right to probe into that, so long as it does not affect my work.
Petr Faitl
· 2 months ago
I think it is a play of PR... firing a guy who bad mouths his employer in the public, can bring back much more negative publicity to the company than the original tweet this guy posted. The proof is in the pudding so to speak... Never heard of the guy before, yet this public lynching has brought up the story to the public domain.
Being an employer, I'd have a quiet word on the side, reprimand him for being silly and perhaps have a look if he has a point! Of course on a repeated offence the scenario might be different.
Jesse Bouman
· 2 months ago
CPK should have used Twitter to address the uniform change publicly, not discharge the employee.
fbrichaut
· 2 months ago
Nobody should criticise their employer publicly, online or anywhere else, and expect to get away with it. But the responsibility should be with the employer to educate their employees about responsible ways to talk about their company. In trivial cases, like this, a warning should have been issued (along with guidelines on what the company consider acceptable/unacceptable) and the employee should be fired only if he disregarded the warning.
All employers today should be sensitive to the fact that many people don't realise the potential impact of what they say online; education can help them avoid making mistakes. Guidelines from the company should address this.
Wandafay
· 2 months ago
No! Absolutely NOT! He did NOT deserve to be fired! Timothy has a right to freedom of speech and this company did NOT have the right to fire him because of it! They may not agree with what he said but infringing upon his constitution rights of freedom of speech by firing him was WRONG! I was fired one time because someone played loud rock music while I was trying to do my job. It was a matter of life and death that I got it right on my job and the music was getting in the way, so I said to my fellow employee "would you turn that fucking music down". I was fired for it! That was wrong! My lame ass employer wouldn't even stand up for me when I was just trying to do my job and get it right! So NO this pizza business was very wrong to fire Timothy and God bless him with a better job and be more successful in life than this little wimpy CPK! We need to stand against our constitutional rights being taken away! Sharing your life, heart and thoughts on social media needs to be OFF limits to company and others taking revenge! STAND UP AMERICA! I may not agree with you about a lot of things but I agree with YOUR FREEDOM of speech and other constitutional rights!! God bless you Timothy!
Craig Luecke
· 2 months ago
Wanda, he USED the company name on Twitter to use profanity. There is NO excuse. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with a company trying to adhere to ethical standards. Believe it or not, statistically a company loses a large sum of money if it offends a general population in anyway. It doesn't take much. CPK was in the right here.
Wandafay
· 2 months ago
I understand what you're saying but it wasn't defamation of character or company name or company pizza. It was a kid expressing how he felt about the uniforms he had to wear. We twitter all kinds of expressions it's twitter world for goodness sake. The company could have took him aside or had a company meeting and told everybody in advance if they tweeted anything at all using the company name in any way that they would be fired. I am just expressing how I feel about this. Maybe I am wrong.
milkfish
· 2 months ago
"Freedom of speech" means that the government can't throw him in prison for what he tweeted. It does not mean that other persons cannot be upset with what he tweeted.
Drew Tomlinson
· 2 months ago
Can't form an opinion when I can't see the video.
TWF
· 2 months ago
If there was no policy, then he should not have been fired. If there was a policy and he didn't abide by it, then he should be accountable for any repercussions defined in that policy.
michael
· 2 months ago
Any company or business has the right to protect it's brand. Sure there could of been a better way to dealing with it. Maybe a warning? but at the end of the day people need to use common sense when using social media. If you would not say it in front of a bunch of people at work, don't post it on twitter.
Jenny
· 2 months ago
Like they could with any negative commentary, CPK missed out on a chance to open up dialogue, engage employees in a uniform design contest, etc. Curious to know what kind of confidentiality/social media agreement CPK has employees sign if at all. Shouldn't have gone unpunished, but firing was too steep.
Name
· 2 months ago
`Hi! I am teaching a rhetoric course on Social Media and am wondering where you got the quote about "8% of US companies have fired employees for social media misuse". I would love to use it but have to have verifiable documentation.
Would have liked to hear his side of the sorry story but the video is set to private....therefore it was correct to fire him.
MichaelADeBose
· 2 months ago
My first and most serious question for California Pizza Kitchen would be, what is its written policy regarding social media? My second would be, has that policy been posted for, explained to, and then signed by employees? Yes there have been employees fired for things on social media sites. Still, these are employees being fired for things that transpired off the clock that were not a party to a legal proceeding, such as DUI or other types of arrest. The right 'fired' employee and an even better lawyer and employers will find themselves regretting their actions if they don't have policies in place that are reasonable and clear. Companies should also be advised that just because you call it policy doesn't make it unassailable in a courtroom. Here in CA, I'd be curious if Tim would be able to get unemployment. I suspect that he could and CPK would not be able to object.
In this instance, even if California Pizza Kitchen has a written policy, they appear to have overreacted. From the PR perspective, Timothy has 17,180 Followers and CPK has 3,906, as in if you fire this guy you might need a REAL reason. In this era of "Internet Famous", meaning when you fire an employee who has a magnitude more followers than your business on Twitter, especially when the employee is local and the followers presumably are local, there is the potential for fallout. That's not to say that Business should be held hostage by media saavy employees. Honestly, if Tim has 17,000 followers and CPK has 3,000, they should really be thinking about promoting him instead. Clearly he understands some things about social media that the guys they pay don't. While his particular brand may not transferable to CPK, at some point regional businesses may find regional celebrities with regional fans, far more bankable than wide base media celebrities.
Ash
· 2 months ago
Come on now. You put entirely too much emphasis on social media when it has no proven longevity as a business strategy. A company can fire a person for 'unprofessional behavior' if they want to. That's exactly what they did. Get over it.
MichaelADeBose
· 2 months ago
I haven't said that social media is the be all to end all. What I am saying is that a guy with 17,000 followers should be fired for something more substantive than the reasons given. I was aware of this over the weekend. The value of social media is yet to be established even as traditional media struggles to maintain its old profit models. You speak of long term longevity, I'm talking about serving up pizza today.
To this I add, as someone who follows youtubers such as Tim and others who routinely post videos that get 10s of thousands of views, how many pizza's can that guy sell in a day. Not as Tim the food server, but as Tim the internet phenom. Social Media isn't a replacement for traditional media, but augments it and at times mimics it. As with any media there is the opportunity to benefit from as well as be damaged by media. There have been some youtubers and myspacers that used those media to get them into the entertainment business. If social media can get people opportunities in the entertainment industry because of the size of their following, there is the opportunity for traditional business to get money out by starting with the "Internet Famous" who already have followings. Whether its a walk in today and say "Myspace" and get 25% off any meal or even an extended hours social media event at a specific restaurant with various social media celebrities in attendance, whose brand aligns with a business' image. Businesses live by word of mouth and social media has allowed some, very large voices, all I'm saying is that businesses such as CPK should be better at recognizing opportunity or better yet understanding how to create opportunity.
Tommy
· 2 months ago
But yet every major company can be found on a social network...I wonder why. Social media cannot be measured in the same format as traditional advertising as you can't particularly measure word-of-mouth advertising, but you know it works.
If CPK furthered their research to find Tim they'd discover that he is a YouTube celeb; #31 most subscribed to comedian (All Time), #40 most viewed (All Time), over 32 mil. video views and a few sponsorships here and there. This guy has over 130k people voluntarily wanting to watch his videos. CPK would've been smart to leverage this and use him as some sort of spokesman.
Understanding YouTube celebs have their own audiences Carl's Jr. (or Hardee's to some of you) recently launched a campaign featuring 9 YouTube celebs. Sanyo, Nickelodeon, Butterfinger and many other companies have tapped these stars to promote their product as well, and you can expect a lot of this.
Sticking a piece of cheese up your nose and then placing it on a sandwich to give to a customer as the Domino's employee did is "unprofessional behavior," complaining about your uniform is not. If CPK thought what Tim did tarnished their brand, then they can be up for a huge surprise if Tim wishes to further "tarnish" CPK. By then, Tim will just be an ex-employee and CPK can just get over it, right?
Michael Aird
· 2 months ago
Something to consider here when possibly firing an employee for something they said or did on social media is how will the backlash come back to haunt the employer? With the Domino's employees it was a no brainer. However, in this circumstance, is what he said regarding CPK really that bad? Maybe in this case it would make sense, I'm not sure. The video is set Private for reasons none of us know, but it's obviously gotten to be some pretty big PR for CPK.
A good question is will that PR be negative or positive. If you fire an employee for a comment or post they made online about the company that isn't that bad, it might come back to haunt you. If the public will be partially on their side, they can make a you-tube video that will hurt you more in the long run than keeping that employee on might have.
What if the company worked on trying to nail that employee for something else than the online comment as to not enrage them like this? Would that work?
Does anyone know somewhere else to view this video? I would like to see what Twitter's latest victim has to say :-)
Tom
· 2 months ago
I don't understand the comments arguing whether or not employers have the "right" to monitor their employees' social media activities. That's like arguing whether or not glaciers have the "right" to form. Regardless of what your stance is on the matter, it happens. Accept it.
Marryam H Reshii
· 2 months ago
Hey, is the employer's name Hitler or Fuhrer? If so, Timothy being fired is justified. Otherwise, no.
Ruth Weal
· 2 months ago
I don't live in the States, but I thought you had that "freedom of speech" thing that you hold so dear? Surely firing an employee for expressing his right to free speech is wrong? Surely social media is covered under freedom of speech? In the UK and Europe he would likely have been given a warning, we have very strong employee rights (though no freedom speech act), which make for a fair system.
I actually wrote about this on the day Tim posted the video, check out my company blog for it. I also have the new re-uploaded video so you can see his side of the story.
All Comments
good rule of thumb for tweeting - always be in line with company mission. He could have worded that differently and probably not had a problem. Something along the lines of "not sure how i feel about these new CPK uniforms - any thoughts?" along with a picture. Leave it up to others to vent or explain.
CPK had every right to fire his dumb ass!
Just sayin'
No longer do companies control their brand outright and this is proof.
I do believe that when you work for a company you are it's representative and a reflection of it's brand, but the onus has to be on the company to ensure that you have the level of engagement with your employees that they feel pride and responsibility to their employer. This also goes with ensuring you employ the right people, with the right attitudes that reflect your company values wherever possible.
Companies need to recognise that employees don't generally live to work, they work to live and many people are disengaged with management and policy because they don't have any sense of personal responsibility and are not properly communicated to or feel the value of their contribution.
CPK has materially damaged it's brand by responding to such a silly statement in such a strong and public way. Perhaps they should be reviewing their employee engagement and communication methods and policies rather than punishing their employee's truthful (if a little vitriolic) opinions.
In the end though CPK was short sighted and has garnered much more bad publicity. Had they played at Timothy's game and responded in less of a knee jerk manner and perhaps stated there reasons for the uniform change they might have come out a lot more favourably than they have done.
Plus I think that employers checking up on a member of staff's social networking habits is unfair. What that person decides to do outside of work and say to people outside of work should have nothing to do with their employer.
Frankly, no one cares if the new uniform compliments his complexion (or whatever he said). You wanna work there, you wear the uniform. You don't like it, quit. You badmouth the company, the hammer may come down on you.
Alanna, I totally disagree with this. What you post when social networking is a representation of your general character, and your employer has every right to know what type of person is working for him/her, or if they should even hire you. Your posts exhibit the 'real you' and the values, or lack of, that you embrace and choose to live by.
What people lose sight of is that when you sign on as an employee you often sign paperwork agreeing to a code of conduct. That covers in person interaction and online interaction. If you agree to those terms then you'll be held accountable. I find it surprising that people feel he's a victim. Were I making the call I'd have handled it differently. Clearly those making the decision on this didn't understand the long term implications of their old school approach. I don't agree with it, but that was their decision to make. For all I know this guy took a job 1 day a week and did this just to get attention to his hip-hop CD. Not likely but it's possible.
The way CPK corporate have acted in this instance is pathetic and disgraceful. They turned a minor instance into major one, whether you agree with CPK or not, the real issue is: Whats the big f**#ing deal CPK? Had they left well enough alone, they would have minimized the impact of this employees criticism, instead they maximized exposure by firing him. Surprise, he turned to social media to vent his frustration. How stupid is this company?
Therefore, I will no longer buy CPK products or eat at CPK restaurants, because its obvious that CPK is the type of company that treats their employees like sh*t, and wastes everybody's time and money. Bravo CPK corporate, Bravo.
And I agree with what others are saying to a certain extent. Essentially what I do in my free time off the clock is my business. What I wear, where I go, who I hang out with, and what I say even in a public place is my business not my employers. Of course there's a thin line in regards to libel. If I complain about a coworker while out in a public restaurant with friends though is still my business. Again its really a very fine line based on whats being said. If I flat out said in public that my company is shitty, pays like crap, and is filled with assholes (which it isn't any of those again thankfully - well not entirely on the last one, but every job/office has their assholes and its our responsibility to come in and work with them professionally despite it).
Clearly CPK overreacted. I agree with what others are saying, they should have addressed the issue of the uniform publicly.
I also think that those of you who said that CPK should promote him is absolutely absurd! We all know that a lot of us have friends on Facebook or whatever that we don't talk to or are constantly stalking online. For someone that would say things like that about a company he represented for, well, let's just say I sure as hell wouldn't want him working for me!
He was being totally selfish and ignorant about the uniforms. Fine if it's his opinion, but because black would make his frame look even smaller?!?! Seriously?? Work out or something then! Stop wasting time making these ridiculous videos and do something about it. What is complaining about the uniforms going to do? Haha, except get you fired in which you now have no job??
Not to mention a detail that maybe not many people have thought about...perhaps if he was a valuable asset to his restaurant and was a great waiter, maybe they wouldn't have fired him? Maybe this Tweet thing was the last straw...?
If the company had a well established communication policy covering social media use and he breached it then yes he should have been fired.
If the company did not yet have a communication policy covering social media then he should not have been fired, but reprimanded. The onus is on every company to establish professional norms expected through social media use by it's employees. This should be covered on the first day of employment.
http://twitter.com/Traphik/statuses/3771478675
(Don't want to paste and submit in while on my work network, because I don't want to end up like Traphik.)
Maybe this kid is a troublemaker. Maybe his employement jacket is filled with disciplinary action for being late for work or missing days, or other belligerent outbursts that weren't Twitter. We just don't know because I don't think we know the whole story.
If a company can't stand in the face of such a tepid comment, I'd have to ask what they are so insecure about? Maybe black button ups are THE LAMEST SHIT EVER? :)
If he has simply said, "I hate this new uniform at work, it sucks" with no reference to a specific company any/or store location, it wouldn't of been a problem.
I believe that CPK has the right to monitor Twitter for comments about them from anyone
I believe that an employee should be held to a completely different standard for what they say about the company they work for.
I believe that the firing of that employee is between him and CPK.
MY OPINION is that based on what I read CPK had good reason to fire him.
Bryan
From what I can tell in the article (since the video has gone private) the employee wasn't excessively rude or using horrible language, nor was he slandering the company.
Lots of employees complain about their uniforms. I knew someone who worked for, I think it was Caribou Coffee at the time, and the company had just issued new aprons with ridiculously small pockets. Many people had mentioned how silly the new uniforms were because the pockets were totally useless. None of them got fired. In my opinion, No one really would have known about this man's opinion about CPK's uniforms. But CPK drew attention to it, and now they've got a bigger problem.
There exists a problem now where companies can easily monitor their employees while off-hours, and the line between on-the-clock and off-the-clock blurs. I seem to remember there was an employee of some company (I think he was a truck driver or something) who was photographed in drag. The people involved didn't make too big a deal over it, and the guy was fired for it. He did this, however, in his off hours. He never brought it up at work, and yet his private life, what he did on his own time, when he was not acting in any way as a representative of his employer, got him fired.
I'm sorry, but when I'm off the clock, what I do is my business. I have a private life, and my employer does not have the right to probe into that, so long as it does not affect my work.
Being an employer, I'd have a quiet word on the side, reprimand him for being silly and perhaps have a look if he has a point! Of course on a repeated offence the scenario might be different.
All employers today should be sensitive to the fact that many people don't realise the potential impact of what they say online; education can help them avoid making mistakes. Guidelines from the company should address this.
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Proofpo...
In this instance, even if California Pizza Kitchen has a written policy, they appear to have overreacted. From the PR perspective, Timothy has 17,180 Followers and CPK has 3,906, as in if you fire this guy you might need a REAL reason. In this era of "Internet Famous", meaning when you fire an employee who has a magnitude more followers than your business on Twitter, especially when the employee is local and the followers presumably are local, there is the potential for fallout. That's not to say that Business should be held hostage by media saavy employees. Honestly, if Tim has 17,000 followers and CPK has 3,000, they should really be thinking about promoting him instead. Clearly he understands some things about social media that the guys they pay don't. While his particular brand may not transferable to CPK, at some point regional businesses may find regional celebrities with regional fans, far more bankable than wide base media celebrities.
To this I add, as someone who follows youtubers such as Tim and others who routinely post videos that get 10s of thousands of views, how many pizza's can that guy sell in a day. Not as Tim the food server, but as Tim the internet phenom. Social Media isn't a replacement for traditional media, but augments it and at times mimics it. As with any media there is the opportunity to benefit from as well as be damaged by media. There have been some youtubers and myspacers that used those media to get them into the entertainment business. If social media can get people opportunities in the entertainment industry because of the size of their following, there is the opportunity for traditional business to get money out by starting with the "Internet Famous" who already have followings. Whether its a walk in today and say "Myspace" and get 25% off any meal or even an extended hours social media event at a specific restaurant with various social media celebrities in attendance, whose brand aligns with a business' image. Businesses live by word of mouth and social media has allowed some, very large voices, all I'm saying is that businesses such as CPK should be better at recognizing opportunity or better yet understanding how to create opportunity.
If CPK furthered their research to find Tim they'd discover that he is a YouTube celeb; #31 most subscribed to comedian (All Time), #40 most viewed (All Time), over 32 mil. video views and a few sponsorships here and there. This guy has over 130k people voluntarily wanting to watch his videos. CPK would've been smart to leverage this and use him as some sort of spokesman.
Understanding YouTube celebs have their own audiences Carl's Jr. (or Hardee's to some of you) recently launched a campaign featuring 9 YouTube celebs. Sanyo, Nickelodeon, Butterfinger and many other companies have tapped these stars to promote their product as well, and you can expect a lot of this.
Sticking a piece of cheese up your nose and then placing it on a sandwich to give to a customer as the Domino's employee did is "unprofessional behavior," complaining about your uniform is not. If CPK thought what Tim did tarnished their brand, then they can be up for a huge surprise if Tim wishes to further "tarnish" CPK. By then, Tim will just be an ex-employee and CPK can just get over it, right?
A good question is will that PR be negative or positive. If you fire an employee for a comment or post they made online about the company that isn't that bad, it might come back to haunt you. If the public will be partially on their side, they can make a you-tube video that will hurt you more in the long run than keeping that employee on might have.
What if the company worked on trying to nail that employee for something else than the online comment as to not enrage them like this? Would that work?
Michael
www.michaelaird.com
follow me: twitter.com/michaelgaird
I actually wrote about this on the day Tim posted the video, check out my company blog for it. I also have the new re-uploaded video so you can see his side of the story.
http://peopull.com/twitter-gets-youtube-star-fi...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TJ-V8wI7Sk
Edit: Crap only found the "Show more comments" now.