Photo: iStock | martin-dm
Should Store Associates be Fired for Posting on Social Media?
An associate at a Gucci store in Los Angeles was recently fired for unboxing everything the luxury store gave her on her first day of work on TikTok and joking about keeping the loot and not returning to work.
Her employment was terminated after her video went viral with 9.3 million views and a Gucci “executive in corporate” saw it. In a follow-up video post, she captioned, “So maybe read the social media guidelines when you get hired or don’t because I hated the job anyway.”
Some commenters on her follow-up post sympathized with the associate.
One said, “They should have given you a promotion in marketing instead of firing you. You made it look cool to work there.”
“Why would you even want to work for a company that fires someone for something so minute?” another asked.
The majority said the firing wasn’t surprising given that numerous others have seen their jobs terminated after sharing videos about their employers online.
Store associates at Walmart, Starbucks and Dollar General are among employees across industries seeing their firings go viral in recent years, primarily for complaining about working conditions.
A recent survey commissioned by Express Employment Professionals revealed that 88 percent of hiring managers in the U.S. would fire employees for social media posts containing certain types of content. Fireable offenses include publishing content damaging the company’s reputation, cited by 59 percent; revealing confidential company information, 58 percent; and showcasing and/or mentioning illegal drug use, 50 percent.
The survey showed that 40 percent of employers discourage using social media during work hours, 30 percent offer professional social media etiquette guidelines, and 26 percent have a social media use policy/contract that employees must sign.
A quarter, nonetheless, encourage their workers to build their personal brand on social media as some see such online employee advocacy boosting employee engagement, brand awareness and recruiting.
Discussion Questions
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: Do you lean toward encouraging retail associates to participate on social media or heavily restricting them? When, if at all, should store associates be fired for posting on social media?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
Cathy Hotka
Principal, Cathy Hotka & Associates
Mark Ryski
Founder, CEO & Author, HeadCount Corporation
I lean toward not encouraging retail associates to participate in social media, unless their job directly requires it. As compelling as social media is, the downside risk of an associate misspeaking or indelicately making a statement could cause a company serious harm. When a new associate is hired, there should be clear guidelines about what is and is not acceptable. Again, this is hard to police and it requires discretion on the part of the employee.
The free, unsponsored publicity and visibility provided by viral retail associates’ social media posts are a competitive advantage that retailers should capitalize on — with some governance and ensuring it aligns with the brand’s purpose and mission. Considering that the ex-Gucci associate generated such interest with her post, luxury, and fashion brands should particularly leverage the power and scale of TikTok and Instagram in a meaningful way and shift the role of store associates accordingly.
Organic and authentic social media storytelling content is where it’s at, and the viral nature of TikTok should be noticed. As retailers look to monetize their TikTok presence, the retail store operating model needs to be reexamined, and the role of the associates should evolve from tactical, operational efforts to becoming brand ambassadors. As this shift begins, there needs to be clearly defined boundaries, governance, brand standards, and financial incentives for viral posts and sales conversions for store associates.
I completely agree, Brandon — brands need to accept that gone are the days of “push” marketing and perfectly curated images. If people are posting positive things about the brand, in particular, it should be encouraged. But even if it’s complaints, is that not just one more data point they could factor in?
The biggest “watch out” to me would be complaining about customers or posting anything without someone knowing. That is something I would not agree with!
Great points, Katie. The authentic storytelling aspects of TikTok and Instagram simply resonate with today’s consumers, far greater than any “push” marketing campaign.
Katie, imagine you are the head of marketing or PR and no longer have control over your brand messaging. Or imagine the lawsuit when I am the subject of an associated TikTok video. A professional photographer has to obtain a release to use a person’s likeness or risk a lawsuit. So what happens when these customers point that lawsuit at your company, as it’s a company-approved behavior?
The service (or lack thereof) in stores today could be better. Imagine when you walk in and all the associates are too busy making TikTok videos to help you.
I completely agree that customer service comes first, John. Several retailers do an outstanding job with this, including all the luxury brands, Apple etc. However TikTok videos and content creation can’t come at the expense of serving customers.
There is a very fine line between leveraging the benefits of employees as influencers and incurring reputation damage from staff publicly venting frustration. The answer lies in better training — not just for staff but for the company’s leadership as well. A brand that is truly authentic in their policies and brand identity shouldn’t fear the occasional bad press but use it as a way to uncover practices they need to change – and own it in the eyes of their customers. Shoppers love brands that are able to laugh at themselves, admit flaws, and authentically try to improve.
Sadly, someone lost their job for showing off Gucci merchandise. I think the real loser is Gucci. Barnum said all publicity is good publicity. In this case, Gucci made a spectacular error.
Sure some things, such as confidential information and misinformation, can be off-limits. While damaging the company’s reputation is a judgment, if it is true–post all you want.
I am all for encouraging associates to post their experiences. As the MSL Group suggests, the associates are better ambassadors than the retailers’ social media team.
Social media is ubiquitous, and retailers should encourage their employees and customers to post brand-related content within reason. The idea is to touch your customers and potential hires in any authentic way possible, and social is where they live. That 25X sharing stat looks pretty appealing to me if I’m in marketing. Why not provide clear guidelines–and even incentives–for posting?
Now, backstabbing, revealing trade secrets and the like have always been grounds for discipline or firing. Social media just amplifies the chances of getting caught. The takeaway here is to get marketing and HR to coordinate on creating the best social policy balance for the brand.
For small retailers in particular, retail associates can serve as powerful ambassadors to local communities. Many retailers don’t have the time or resources to support dedicated social media outreach. The key is to provide guidelines and content support to ensure alignment with company goals and positioning. Positive empowerment and encouragement can fuel employee and customer engagement.
It would be impractical to demand that employees not participate in social media posts and chats. However if the posts and conversations are derogatory to the employer, the employee opens him/herself up to liability. If one is that unhappy with the employer, and has exhausted talking to superiors about the problems, and one expresses the discontent publicly, one should either resign or expect to be fired.
I lean toward people respecting themselves enough to do a phenomenal job at whatever they choose to do which includes recognizing that they are an extension of the brand or company for which they work. Unfortunately, social media has proven the old adage that common sense ain’t so common and companies have been forced to parent employees and restrict activities that are harmful to their business. I’m baffled that she expected to keep her job after unboxing a gift from the employer for which she chose to work and saying that she might keep the gift and not return. Absent seeing the video, that seems in bad taste and a poor choice. Companies are often restricted about what they can say about “bad” employees on references; it would seem fair to expect that both parties exhibit a better than average level of maturity and decorum.
I have a different comment, or question: What kinds of screening and hiring practices allowed Gucci to hire this associate in the first place? This kind of bad behavior from Day One isn’t about the negative influence of social media, it’s really about hiring somebody unfit for the job.
High-profile firings are bad publicity for the brand. Hire carefully, have clear guidelines, and understand your associate experience.
At the risk of receiving a huge “OK Boomer,” I’d say associates, leave your phone in the back room. For emergencies, give out the store number, we’ll find you. If you want to post on social from the back room, keep it positive, because if you’re disparaging our brand, you should start to look for a job you won’t do that at.
I wonder how many of my BrainTrust colleagues have actually watched the video. It certainly does not represent what Gucci wants to portray. I’m all for advocating for the place that employs you, but this isn’t marketing genius at work and if they had a policy against it–goodbye.
Let’s be super clear. Posting on social media to promote product is one thing. Saying you will keep the goods and “ghost” Gucci is another. This employee should be terminated as the messaging was not about using social for good. This employee was clearly in the wrong.
Store associates and brand ambassadors are the best influencers and should be encouraged to post on social if it is in the best interest of the brand. There are guidelines and lines that should not be crossed. This employee crossed the lines and should be grateful that she is getting product to represent the brand for free. Many employees get a discount but can’t even afford to buy product to wear in-store.
I started on the shop floor and found it difficult to afford luxury goods on my paycheck in my early 20s. Even as a buyer, I had to save up to buy product to wear during store visits early in my career. Getting product for free is a privilege and should never be taken lightly.
Wonderfully, beautifully, perfectly articulated.
Positive, passionate employees are a strategic asset. Companies need clear guidelines, including boundaries for employees’ social media use.
Agreed, Lisa. Like any program with employees, taking the positive, the upside is the way to go. The onus is on leadership to make sure guidelines are in place, but I’d also argue for adding perks or awards for employees who post well, with desired results in mind.
Access to social media is not a license to go rogue. If marketing is not specifically part of your job description, then don’t. Have some great ideas? Run them up the flagpole, at the risk of hearing “no thanks.” Employers, have a mechanism for listening to this amazing new source of ideas and creativity. It could get messy and cumbersome, but it could also be worth it.
Employee advocacy on social media is a powerful brand relationship builder with consumers because it delivers more authenticity than a brand account can demonstrate. However, like with all things, there need to be guidelines and retailers should establish social sharing policies so that employees aren’t sharing confidential information or potentially generating bad publicity. Without stated guidelines for sharing, it’s difficult for many employees to know what’s safe and appropriate to post or not. However retailers should definitely not look to stop employees, even store associates, from posting on social. Instead, retailers should look to develop these skills as a strength of the brand and as a benefit of working at the company. What employee doesn’t want the opportunity to build their personal brand? The potential for this to be a win-win-win for employee, retailer, and consumer is huge if executed properly!
I lean towards allowing associates to leverage social media because it can be a powerful tool for promotion, influence, brand building, etc. Yet these freedoms come with accountability. To help mitigate some of this risk, companies must provide clear and unambiguous guidelines for every employee, with examples of what is acceptable and unacceptable, and detailing explicit consequences for violating the stated policies.
Social media is an incredibly powerful tool when used positively, the trouble is it is an equally powerful weapon when used negatively. Once you give license for employees to talk about your brand you are out of control of the content. Yes you can put in place strong guidelines but they can be open to interpretation. The guidelines are essential and they need to be as watertight as possible. Should you sack someone for posting that they did not like working for you? I would think a better way of handling this would be to find out why and try and put it right. You will never keep everyone happy but firing is a last resort and is never good news for employee or employer.
There is another alternative to either encouraging or heavily restricting employees’ social media use — just leave them alone to do whatever they do or don’t want to do unless it violates specific guidelines that are reviewed and agreed to in writing when they are hired.
Obviously, for example, videos of fast-food workers spitting on food or dropping it on the floor and then wrapping it up and selling it to a customer can damage a brand and should be grounds for termination and prosecution. But past those kinds of infractions, the best policy is to let folks be folks — good and bad. The internet can’t be adequately policed, let alone the so-called “Dark Web,” so why tie up resources trying to sniff out every possible infraction? And think of consumers, especially younger ones. Are they going to flock in droves to brands with “Big Brother” scrutiny over their hourly employees’ private lives? I don’t think so.
As to when employees should be fired for social media-related infractions, again, that’s simple. Figure out what digital behaviors you think are unacceptable and make refraining from them a condition of employment. But I’d stick to things that are, in fact, violations of law. If somebody wants to complain about their job, let them. If they want to pour bleach in fountain drinks as a TikTok challenge, fire them and prosecute them. But whatever the standard is, it should be written and signed off on by the new employee.
I think retailers have much more to worry about than monitoring their employees’ social posts about their brand. If you’re more concerned about them joking that they will keep the merch than you are about building a great experience for the associates, I think you have the wrong priorities.
I’m all for “free speech,” but I recognize the consequences of words. For any business, there should be certain guidelines about what you can post on social media. It starts with training and the onboarding process. By the way, those guidelines can include a “no posting policy.” So, the range can be from nothing to anything. The brand/retailer must define the parameters.
Personally, I’m for leaning into social media with the right guidelines in place. I want our employees to be brand ambassadors. And showing off products and services to the world in the right context is powerful on at least two levels. First, it showcases the products, which is a form of PR and advertising. Second, it showcases the employees’ enthusiasm for their company. What company wouldn’t want that?
Retail management should read the comments posted here. They demonstrate that there are clear pros and cons to associates participating on social media. Given the widespread use of social media for almost anything, if management doesn’t want their employees to reference their store or their merchandise, that should be made very, very clear.
Retailers have social media policies in the employee handbook (the one no one ever reads). I know that they have been revisiting those policies so store associates understand them. There should be no misunderstanding if they take the time to read and adhere to the rules.
Your store associates are your best brand advocates. When a store associate advocates for the brand and shares the company’s content through their own social ecosystem, the brand automatically extends its reach. On average, store associates have a collective network that is 10 times larger than the company’s follower base.
To get the best results, it’s important to develop a social media training program for the store team. In fact, brands can even make it a part of store associates’ onboarding process. Train associates on posting protocols and schedules and knowing how to use the platforms that work best for your business. Retail brands can take advantage of the rising social selling retail trend by training store associates to generate sales through social platforms.
Agreed Mohammad. Marketing teams should keep tabs on all EGC (employee generated content) and both have plans to A.) notify employees/management when it goes against their guidelines and B.) identify, elevate,and support those employees who have an opportunity to be influential content creators/advocates for the brand.
OK so the Gucci employee deserved to be fired for disrespecting the brand in a very public and damaging way.
But employee influencers can also add considerable value to the brand.
I wonder how much social media training the company provides to its employees. Are clear guidelines provided? Does it require employees to sign off on them? Does the corporate communications department regularly celebrate successful posts with store teams and amplify them?
Sorry it this scenario makes the PR control freaks queasy, but it’s high time they accept that every customer-facing associate is already part of the communications team. Every one arrives with a smart digital device and one or more social media accounts.
Here’s a radical notion for retailers: How about providing social media training as a career benefit? Teach them what kinds of posts will help advance their careers and make this part of the employee review process. Punishment after the fact is a pathetic strategy.
I would absolutely not encourage it. Restrictions should be simple: post nothing defamatory or that endangers security, safety or privacy…I would think these would be common sense. And since the violations of these would, by definition, be serious, termination should definitely be an option.
Social media is too strong of a marketing tool to reach target customers to not embrace it. Businesses need to be simple and clear, not only in the rules, limitations and consequences for employees misusing it, but also in the vast upside of brand building. Employees deserve playbooks on how to company story tell, identified products/service priorities, visual standards, financial incentives and perks to express their passion. This is more a matter of leadership doing the hard work of pulling together a complete tool kit so it’s effective and fully embraced.