business person social media

New DPS social media policy is ‘too restrictive’

The updated DPS Social Media Policy requires Director approval before employees can post work-related content on social media.

A DPS spokesperson said mandarin The change comes after management was prosecuted for legal action involving social media posts made by an employee.

The DPS includes the implications of Supreme Court rulings in the separate matters of Banerjee and Fuller.

“The policy was modified following legal proceedings in which the department was named as the second defendant for indirect responsibility for copyright infringement and defamation,” the spokesperson said.

The spokesman added that the new policy, which was first mentioned before Canberra TimesIt will not prevent employees from engaging in the discussion on social media. Prior to updating the policy, DPS also consulted with relevant employees and unions, including the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU).

The CPC spokesman said he did not raise any concerns at the time and did not provide any comments.

Andrew Hughes, a management lecturer in the School of Business and Economics at ANU, has been highly critical of the policy, saying mandarin He thought that meant that public officials were less likely to whistle about wrongdoing.

Hughes was particularly critical of the decision to approve a social media post with a single decision maker.

“If you have questions about authority, questions about career path, it’s a real threat in some way because of that reason.

“It’s not as if it’s being scrutinized by a committee that might be more impartial and independent, or looking at it through the prism of what might directly harm the organization itself.

“Intervene in: Who is going to challenge their boss? And who is going to challenge their boss in something like that?” said the academic.

Hughes cited the Queensland Public Service Coaldrake Report, which called for a public sector culture where open and constructive criticism was encouraged and whistleblowers better protected.

This does not mean, obviously, [that] “People can come forward and take to social media about anything and everything,” Hughes said.

“But I think what that means is that there has to be a more accepting culture that people are going to post things, sometimes, that might be at odds with organizations within government.”

Dr Peter Chen of the University of Sydney made similar points, adding that having an operation, no matter how fast the turnaround, defeats the purpose of punctuality in social media posts.

“There is clearly debate about how DPS should be seen as fair treatment in their relations within Parliament, as well as professional issues around risky rhetoric,” said the senior lecturer in Government and International Relations.

But this needs to be balanced by the fact that employers take a degree of risk in their labor relationships […] If you allow your organization to be overly risk-controlled, you are effectively allowing any potential litigant to set up your communications policy for you,” Chen said.

Chen added that drawing the line in what is and what is not related to work can fall into the muddy waters.

“This is a cultural thing about the way the public and private worlds have collapsed.

“Employers may bemoan this, but they also encouraged it to some extent: expect employees to be ‘always on’ and also want employees to use their social media to promote positive projects or activities that stem from an individual’s employment,” he said.


Read more:

New social media guide for public officials highlights the dangers of posting, sharing, and even ‘liking’ content online

#DPS #social #media #policy #restrictive

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *