Hello, I am the Head Aviation and Accountable Manager from XXX Aviation Pvt Limited.
We had a very sensitive incident a couple of months ago when an employee from our organization posted an objectionable photograph (partially obscene) on her social media wall. This was noticed by me and a couple of other colleagues and clients, and it was discussed over a period of time. I had spoken to the employee and requested that she consider removing the post since most of our clients and coworkers had seen it and reported it. However, she refused to remove it, and the issue was ignored. Now, there is another issue where the employee continues to use the same picture as her display picture on WhatsApp (a personal number that is used for official communication as well).
I would like to know if we, as a company, can take any action against the employee or if we should maintain the status quo. I would appreciate it if any of you could guide me on this.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1We had a very sensitive incident a couple of months ago when an employee from our organization posted an objectionable photograph (partially obscene) on her social media wall. This was noticed by me and a couple of other colleagues and clients, and it was discussed over a period of time. I had spoken to the employee and requested that she consider removing the post since most of our clients and coworkers had seen it and reported it. However, she refused to remove it, and the issue was ignored. Now, there is another issue where the employee continues to use the same picture as her display picture on WhatsApp (a personal number that is used for official communication as well).
I would like to know if we, as a company, can take any action against the employee or if we should maintain the status quo. I would appreciate it if any of you could guide me on this.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Member,
As an employee of an organization, basic discipline is expected from the employee. If there is an incident involving any act that is not in line with the spirit of general morale or is unbecoming of a disciplined employee, one should be warned that their actions are denting the image of the organization. Therefore, disciplinary action may be initiated against him/her.
You may seek an explanation through a show-cause notice. While you may control anyone's social expression on those platforms expressed privately, you are at liberty to proceed with public acts when they are connected or related to company transactions.
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As an employee of an organization, basic discipline is expected from the employee. If there is an incident involving any act that is not in line with the spirit of general morale or is unbecoming of a disciplined employee, one should be warned that their actions are denting the image of the organization. Therefore, disciplinary action may be initiated against him/her.
You may seek an explanation through a show-cause notice. While you may control anyone's social expression on those platforms expressed privately, you are at liberty to proceed with public acts when they are connected or related to company transactions.
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Prakash,
You have shared an incident in your company wherein you feel that sharing an alleged obscene photograph violates the sensibilities of your staff. A learned member has even recommended taking disciplinary action against her. Nevertheless, the basic questions that arise here are:
a) Who are we to draw the line of morality or obscenity?
b) Under which act or law can an organization initiate disciplinary action against the "erring" employee?
c) "Pasting a certain type of photograph", has this misconduct been defined in the standing orders of your company?
My comments on the employee's conduct are as below:
d) Posting a certain type of photograph on social media: - What type of photographs to post on social media is a personal matter of the employee. If those who follow her on social media get offended, then they can unfollow her. The lady is exercising her personal liberty. Why are her colleagues intruding on her personal preferences? If they really feel that the photograph offends their sensibilities, then let them file a suit in their personal capacity. Neither do they need to drag the company administration into the private matter between two individuals, nor can the objecting employees expect to shoot the gun of their morality from the shoulder of the company.
e) Posting a certain type of photograph on her personal phone: - It is her personal phone, and what type of photographs to post is her personal choice. If the company staff does not like to see such photographs, then let the company issue her an official phone, and the logo of the company can be uploaded as the DP.
Final comments on the incident: - My humble recommendation is just to ignore this incident. The company staff are paid for their work or duties and not for moral policing. Rather than worrying about the photograph, let them worry about their customer satisfaction or how to improve the product or process they deliver to the customer.
However, the trouble with Indians is that they are too obsessed with the application of personal standards while judging others. The Indian society has such depraved men that a grandfather does not find anything wrong in killing his granddaughter for wearing a pair of jeans! Nevertheless, the double standards of these depraved men galore. A few examples of the double standards are as below:
f) If the legislators watch a pornographic film when the state assembly is conducting its legislative business, it is perfectly fine. These very legislators not only go scot-free but one of them even becomes the Deputy Chief Minister! The employees of your company who claim a violation of sensibilities, just ask them what they did when the legislators watched porn in the assembly. I hope you have understood which state I am referring to because most probably they are from the same state!
g) A 70-year-old politician openly harasses her counterpart in the state during the election rallies. He did it not just once but several times. The staff who raise the objection now, why were they silent when the TV channels broadcast the harassment live?
h) As long as obscene photographs are concerned, what is obscene and what is not obscene is a personal opinion. Almost all the newspapers or movie-related magazines publish very bold photographs of actors and actresses. This has not been happening lately but has been happening for the last several decades. Ask these people from your company, do they read newspapers or not? For the sake of these offensive photographs, have they stopped reading the newspapers also?
i) Just a few hundred kilometers away from the city that you belong to, there is an ancient Hindu temple which is also an architectural marvel. In this star-shaped temple, many images are sculpted on mythological stories. There is also a sculpture that depicts the copulation of a couple in the doggy style! Should our society practice iconoclasm to promote the sensibilities of the 21st century?
My point is limited to the cravenness of the moral police. They know well that their colleague is a soft target, and that is why they are targeting her. In contrast, they shrink to pusillanimous rabbits in front of the high and mighty.
Indians have a lot of time to make an issue of a non-issue. This is just one more example. Rather than worrying about how to make the enterprise competitive, we have a lot of time for gossiping. This moral police is a multi-headed monster, and when it could pop up which head that cannot be estimated. Around 350 years ago, King Shivaji faced resistance from the moral police for constructing a fort on the island on the west coast. Though no such verses existed, the moral police decreed that seafaring is prohibited according to religious verses! Their contention was that since seafaring was prohibited, raising a marine defense force is also prohibited. Today's generation is doing nothing but carrying the legacy of moral policing forward!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have shared an incident in your company wherein you feel that sharing an alleged obscene photograph violates the sensibilities of your staff. A learned member has even recommended taking disciplinary action against her. Nevertheless, the basic questions that arise here are:
a) Who are we to draw the line of morality or obscenity?
b) Under which act or law can an organization initiate disciplinary action against the "erring" employee?
c) "Pasting a certain type of photograph", has this misconduct been defined in the standing orders of your company?
My comments on the employee's conduct are as below:
d) Posting a certain type of photograph on social media: - What type of photographs to post on social media is a personal matter of the employee. If those who follow her on social media get offended, then they can unfollow her. The lady is exercising her personal liberty. Why are her colleagues intruding on her personal preferences? If they really feel that the photograph offends their sensibilities, then let them file a suit in their personal capacity. Neither do they need to drag the company administration into the private matter between two individuals, nor can the objecting employees expect to shoot the gun of their morality from the shoulder of the company.
e) Posting a certain type of photograph on her personal phone: - It is her personal phone, and what type of photographs to post is her personal choice. If the company staff does not like to see such photographs, then let the company issue her an official phone, and the logo of the company can be uploaded as the DP.
Final comments on the incident: - My humble recommendation is just to ignore this incident. The company staff are paid for their work or duties and not for moral policing. Rather than worrying about the photograph, let them worry about their customer satisfaction or how to improve the product or process they deliver to the customer.
However, the trouble with Indians is that they are too obsessed with the application of personal standards while judging others. The Indian society has such depraved men that a grandfather does not find anything wrong in killing his granddaughter for wearing a pair of jeans! Nevertheless, the double standards of these depraved men galore. A few examples of the double standards are as below:
f) If the legislators watch a pornographic film when the state assembly is conducting its legislative business, it is perfectly fine. These very legislators not only go scot-free but one of them even becomes the Deputy Chief Minister! The employees of your company who claim a violation of sensibilities, just ask them what they did when the legislators watched porn in the assembly. I hope you have understood which state I am referring to because most probably they are from the same state!
g) A 70-year-old politician openly harasses her counterpart in the state during the election rallies. He did it not just once but several times. The staff who raise the objection now, why were they silent when the TV channels broadcast the harassment live?
h) As long as obscene photographs are concerned, what is obscene and what is not obscene is a personal opinion. Almost all the newspapers or movie-related magazines publish very bold photographs of actors and actresses. This has not been happening lately but has been happening for the last several decades. Ask these people from your company, do they read newspapers or not? For the sake of these offensive photographs, have they stopped reading the newspapers also?
i) Just a few hundred kilometers away from the city that you belong to, there is an ancient Hindu temple which is also an architectural marvel. In this star-shaped temple, many images are sculpted on mythological stories. There is also a sculpture that depicts the copulation of a couple in the doggy style! Should our society practice iconoclasm to promote the sensibilities of the 21st century?
My point is limited to the cravenness of the moral police. They know well that their colleague is a soft target, and that is why they are targeting her. In contrast, they shrink to pusillanimous rabbits in front of the high and mighty.
Indians have a lot of time to make an issue of a non-issue. This is just one more example. Rather than worrying about how to make the enterprise competitive, we have a lot of time for gossiping. This moral police is a multi-headed monster, and when it could pop up which head that cannot be estimated. Around 350 years ago, King Shivaji faced resistance from the moral police for constructing a fort on the island on the west coast. Though no such verses existed, the moral police decreed that seafaring is prohibited according to religious verses! Their contention was that since seafaring was prohibited, raising a marine defense force is also prohibited. Today's generation is doing nothing but carrying the legacy of moral policing forward!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Social responsibility lecture.pdf
The Economic & Social Planning Act, 2009.doc
Social style grid.xls