Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

New team member problem with SM & appearing on the internet

92 replies

SanJayH · 19/04/2023 21:25

I have a new member of my team who’s just started at the company. She flew through the interview and I think she’s going to be great at her job. We were completing the induction process by having pictures taken for her work badge and her profile on the website, but she suddenly announced that she couldn’t appear on any kind of social media or our website due to ‘personal reasons’.

I totally respect she is entitled to her privacy but we work in an industry which it’s kind of expected to appear on various social media platforms and on checking with HR I was informed it’s company policy to appear with a picture and profile on our website.

I’m a bit stuck as to how best proceed so I wondered if anyone else had experience of this?

OP posts:
shintyminty · 20/04/2023 08:11

You can't put this in a normal job contract. Separate consent will be required.

She is perfectly entitled to refuse. Consent as a legal basis is dodgy for employers in this sort of scenario because of the imbalance of power between employee and employer.

shintyminty · 20/04/2023 08:12

Also. The way you describe it is judgemental "a problem with". She's not a problem and be careful that you don't make her seem so by the language you use.

burnoutbabe · 20/04/2023 08:17

In sone industries it would be odd to refuse. Say a law firm where everyone appears in the website for clients to look at/get contact details.

But then you can do a slightly different name -s smith or have a different work name /surname plus no photo.

That would be a reasonable compromise.

loislovesstewie · 20/04/2023 08:21

The minute you said 'big personalities' I thought ' is the tail wagging the dog?' Just tell them to mind their own business, and reconsider the whole SM thing. Whatever her reasons I don't see that she should have to have photos etc out there for all to see. I would have loathed this, for reasons of my own safety.

Reugny · 20/04/2023 08:22

burnoutbabe · 20/04/2023 08:17

In sone industries it would be odd to refuse. Say a law firm where everyone appears in the website for clients to look at/get contact details.

But then you can do a slightly different name -s smith or have a different work name /surname plus no photo.

That would be a reasonable compromise.

Solicitors appear on a register which you can look up.

Other staff don't have to appear though.

shintyminty · 20/04/2023 08:28

burnoutbabe · 20/04/2023 08:17

In sone industries it would be odd to refuse. Say a law firm where everyone appears in the website for clients to look at/get contact details.

But then you can do a slightly different name -s smith or have a different work name /surname plus no photo.

That would be a reasonable compromise.

There's a solicitor roll though?

Looking someone up by name does not require a photograph.

LadyRoughDiamond · 20/04/2023 08:29

If you’re in a creative industry or one that creates content for SM, do you have access to a picture library? A random photo (and maybe a pseudonym if this is a dangerous situation) should solve it.

ClairDeLaLune · 20/04/2023 08:45

There’s software now where people can be searched for using their image. If she’s in witness protection or has escaped an abusive relationship, your firm’s policy could cost her her life. Your firm has no right to expect her to disclose either of these facts to them. She isn’t the “problem” and you shouldn’t describe her as such. It’s the firm’s policy and the “big personalities” that are the problems here.

ferneytorro · 20/04/2023 08:46

thecatsthecats · 19/04/2023 21:54

I dealt with issues like this very firmly within my team. Some people forget that their "big personality" isn't appropriate at work.

If they were raised in public, I would say that it was not a matter up for discussion. If raised in private, then the same, but in much stricter words and tone.

If raised again, then a very serious reminder that any further intrusive questions would become a disciplinary matter.

Exactly this. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence will surely think that the reason for this stance by her will be because of an abusive situation or something serious.

luckylavender · 20/04/2023 08:53

Dressshelp · 19/04/2023 21:28

Can you sensitively ask why? I had a staff member previously who didn’t want to be on our socials because of not wanting to be found by a family member. We used a logo and initials (S Smith instead of Sarah smith type thing)

No don't do that. Let HR handle it.

katmarie · 20/04/2023 08:57

With your big personality types, I have worked with people like this. They're a pain in the arse. If they asked me why this person wasn't appearing on the website etc, I would be pretty blunt.
'I haven't asked her, and I don't expect you to either. She declined her permission so her picture won't be going on the website. The reasons are none of our business.'

If further discussion comes up, shut it down just as firmly. Big personality or not, it's her business and no one elses.

The next question will almost inevitably be
'Well can I have my picture taken down then?'

To which you will have to agree, I would direct them to submit their request to HR, and let HR deal with the fact the policy is crap.

KitKatLove · 20/04/2023 09:25

I’m not fleeing domestic abuse or victim to a stalker. I just wouldn’t want my picture on the website and as such that should be respected.

Catspyjamas17 · 20/04/2023 09:26

It sounds like the team need training on
how to be a sensitive human being and not big gallahs putting their foot in it about people's private lives. Or how to get their heads out of their arses and read a book or something occasionally.

RedEyeBaby · 20/04/2023 09:26

Unless the big personalities are Donald Duck and Goofy, your new employee is Mickey Mouse, and you all work at Disneyland, I agree with you and PPs that they are going to have to suck it up and keep quiet, and it's a good lesson in respect and humility for them to do so.

Middletoleft · 20/04/2023 09:38

On a couple of instances. One was a victim of DV and the circumstances were horrendous. Any decent company would understand.

The other was transitioning but wasn't in the business long enough for it to be an issue.

Oopstheregoesanotherrubbertreeplant · 20/04/2023 10:31

@Socialdistancechampion Thank you!

Skybluepinky · 20/04/2023 10:40

She could be in witness protection or have escaped from an abusive partner or stalker, sounds like the company need to change the rules to protect its staff.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page