AA Social Media Policy

[scandalou]

FAs have been receiving numerous reminders for them to complete a new online training program called Value of Respect II by Aug. 31. in which AA inserted their Social Media Policy, and by completing the training you are signing off that you will abide by this company policy (basically saying that You cannot and will not disparge the company in any way or form whether you're on the job or on your own personal time. Example: no discussing company/management "ineptness" in a public forum or blog.)

I was wondering if any other work group has to complete some kind of "training" wherein this Social Media Policy is included.

The APFA has filed a grievance against the Policy but so far there has not been any update nor news about the progress of the grievance. several FAs have filed NODs against doing this Value of Respect training but all we're getting from the union is "talk to your base reps", who in turn say "ask the VPs office", who in turn say "ask you base reps". typical union merry-go-round reply when they dont want to deal with a potential problem.

your thoughts?

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Dont take the course

 

[AC AA LA FA]

Im not taking the course until issued a directive to do so.

 

[Imjustsayin]

Im not taking the course until issued a directive to do so.

Wow, now there's a well thought out plan...

 

[eolesen]

The only thing which looks new here is clarification that an employee's actions on blogs & forums are perhaps now being interpreted as falling under the rule of conduct which says not to engage in behavior which reflects poorly on the company.

You all agreed to a general set of 32 or 33 rules of conduct when you signed your employment applications. Being ignorant of what you signed isn't going to be a very good defense if you're called out on them.

Frankly, it's about time they started paying attention to stuff like this. It's one thing to criticize management's action. It's another altogether to be going for the throat the way many on this forum do. Some of it crosses the line of slander or defamation of character.

I'm sure at least one of you will pipe up and say "they have no character" but that's also not relevant. There's a civil way to express discourse with the company, and that died well before 2003.

 

[Imjustsayin]

The only thing which looks new here is clarification that an employee's actions on blogs & forums are perhaps now being interpreted as falling under the rule of conduct which says not to engage in behavior which reflects poorly on the company.

You all agreed to a general set of 32 or 33 rules of conduct when you signed your employment applications. Being ignorant of what you signed isn't going to be a very good defense if you're called out on them.

Frankly, it's about time they started paying attention to stuff like this. It's one thing to criticize management's action. It's another altogether to be going for the throat the way many on this forum do. Some of it crosses the line of slander or defamation of character.

I'm sure at least one of you will pipe up and say "they have no character" but that's also not relevant. There's a civil way to express discourse with the company, and that died well before 2003.

Well said, sir.

 

[jimntx]

I don't know what the big deal is. All the years I was with Texaco, we had to endure this kind of training on a regular basis. Difference from AA--at Texaco we didn't get paid extra to take the training. The reward we received was getting to keep our jobs.

Look, some of it is pretty much a waste of time, some of it was good. That's more than you can say about other training we have had to take. Remember Yourworld back in 2001?

The part about the new IFE systems on the 737, 757, and 767 is really interesting. If they complete the conversions we will have some really nice IFE in the future.

The Diversity training is the same it has been since at least the 1980's, if not earlier. "Don't use the N word. Don't point and giggle at the fat people. Etc." Wow! Who knew? The first Civil Rights Act was passed 46 years ago, and this is the first I've heard of any of this.

Look, in this day and age you are not going to win a grievance over training that is supposed to increase one's "sensitivity." Just do the training, collect your 3 hours pay, and move on. All of this kvetching about it just makes us look like the "I want to collect a paycheck and do absolutely nothing in return for it" group that some people think we are.

The Social Media policy is no different from any other major corporation. Basically, it's if you want to work for this company do not speak ill of the company in public forums. Do not represent yourself to anyone as speaking for the company in an official capacity unless you are in fact an official spokesperson (see I paid attention in diversity training). Do not divulge information that is considered corporate confidential info--profit margins on particular routes. Future route plans. Etc.

When I started with Texaco in 1979, I had to sign a similar agreement on my first day on the job. Texaco HR used to say that the "English translation" of the agreement was "Don't plan to write the great American novel based on your experiences here at Texaco."

One note of warning: Do the training on a terminal in Ops at work. Do NOT attempt to do the training on your home computer. I couldn't get the training module to download; so, I did the HR Chat thingy with the training people. They connected me to a young woman in tech support who told me with no irony or guile whatsover that...
"You need to disable your antivirus software to run the lessons."

When I tried to question this statement, she said very curtly, "That's just the way it is. Do it, or don't do it." (A strong implication of "I don't care which.")

P.S. I reported this to the Contract Desk at the APFA. As far as I know, no one there has made any attempt to use this information to help us with this. They certainly haven't called me for more info or clarification or anything.

 

[wcs]

There's a civil way to express discourse ...

Too bad that civility is only being required for employees.

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

I agree with the sentiment that there is quite a bit of outright defamation and libel on this forum. Voicing one's opinion is one thing, but some of the baseless accusations I read on here could use a little accountability if they have no basis in fact.