Company getting involved in personal activities???

[First class]

Important: This is all hypothetical:

Right, basically, would like some advice on how far a company can interfere in your private time outside work.

Say, (for example), a video appeared of me on the internet doing things which may be questionable, but certainly not illegal, as an example lets say a "home video" . My face is clearly displayed, and unquestionably it is me.

There is nothing at all in the video that would enable a link between me and my employer, except if a passenger recognised me as an employee from watching it. So no company logo/uniform etc.

A manager happens to "innocently" come across this video and recognises it's me. He or she decides that it "brings the company into disrepute" as some of the other viewers may travel on the network, and may see me.

A 'gross misconduct' charge is then levied against me.

Does the company have any legal ground to support such a charge?

The whole point of this thread really is to identify whether a company can justifiably discipline employees that are:

1) Not on duty
2) Make no mention of the company
3) Are not in uniform
4) Not on their property
5) Involved in activities that may only cater for certain tastes.

I'd appreciate all your comments. Again, this is, of course only hypothetical.

Thanks!!!

 

[transportphoto]

Dont think so - if they do I'm sure they are in the wrong.

 

[theblackwatch]

I think you'd be better off speaking to your union who will have lawyers that will no doubt have dealt with this sort of thing before. Also, a good study of terms of employment may be needed - I assume most people have never looked at them in any detail.

EDIT: Just to add to this, people really do need to remember they should only put things up on the internet which they are happy for ANYBODY to see! A home video of you and the girlfriend/boyfriend could not only be stumbled across by a work manager, but neighbours, colleagues, friends, family, etc.

 

[DavyCrocket]

Sounds like they are trying to "shaft" you....

 

[First class]

Please remember this is me being hypothetical!! I'm not an amateur porn star! (yet)!

 

[royaloak]

How is the pay for that, hear you have to work a month in hand

 

[theblackwatch]

Please remember this is me being hypothetical!! I'm not an amateur porn star! (yet)!

My use of the word 'you' was a general one, not aimed at you specifically - my comments apply to everyone, male and female!

 

[A60K]

I would check the contract of employment - it is considered reasonable for some employers to put in some restrictions on how employees should conduct themselves outside of work.

For instance, if an spokesman of the Equalities Commission was seen on TV news attending a meeting of the BNP as a member it might be seen as undermining the purpose of their employment.

 

[GB]

Im in no doubt that there are managers in some companies that will try and do you for the hypothetical situation you describe and that some may even go as far as terminating your employment. However I think you would have a very good and very strong case of unfair dismissal if you took it to a employment tribunal.

 

[Wyvern]

There were a couple of blokes who worked for Ashfield Council near me who appeared on television in a programme about their cross dressing. The council tried to fire them but I don't think they succeeded.

 

[jon0844]

There were a couple of blokes who worked for Ashfield Council near me who appeared on television in a programme about their cross dressing. The council tried to fire them but I don't think they succeeded.

Bloody hell - councils are usually extremely tolerant of everything.