PLC Public Sector reports:
Important communications tool, a dangerous opportunity for employees to bring authorities into disrepute or simply a drain on employee productivity. Two recent developments show that the public sector has yet to reach a consensus on which of these categories Twitter falls into.
Plymouth City Council has recently banned members of staff from accessing the social networking site Twitter from the council’s computers. This is against the backdrop of an announcement by the government urging civil servants to use the site more frequently. A Cabinet Office spokesperson stated:
“it’s important that, as part of our communications approach, the government develops its capability to use digital channels more effectively and that includes social media tools such as Twitter”.
Leaving aside the irony of the Government managing to produce a 5,000 word, 20 page guide to micro-blogging, at first glance there appears to be some conflict here.
Plymouth justifies its decision by arguing that some of the so called “tweets” posted by council staff are inappropriate. Tudor Evans (leader of the Council’s Labour group and frequent tweeter), however, argues that banning Twitter “makes the council a laughing stock.”
Laughing stock or not Plymouth City Council is perfectly within its rights to prevent staff from using Twitter. It is difficult to believe that an employee has not (yet!) mounted a challenge to a ban claiming that refusing access to Twitter or another social networking site is in breach of their human rights. However, even if they did, it should be easy to argue that such a ban was proportionate in accordance with the principles set out in the ECHR in Soering v. the United Kingdom. Of more relevance is the Information Commissioner’s Employment Practices Code (the Code). This states that employers must have an internet policy defining appropriate and inappropriate internet use. Employees must be made aware of such policies at the point of induction and be required to read them from time to time. The policy should also be routinely enforced. Therefore, as long as Plymouth declares social networking to be prohibited in its internet policy and enforces the policy correctly (blocking sites such as Twitter), it would fulfil the requirements of the Code. Plymouth City Council may be a laughing stock but they are acting entirely within the law. However, is a blanket ban the practical course of action?
Which of the categories set out at the start of this post Twitter actually falls into will, in truth, differ according to the role of the staff concerned. The Cabinet Office guidance has been published on the basis that Twitter and other social networking tools can be used to publish important policy developments to a wider audience. It does not recommend that the entire civil service spend their days informing the world that they have had a busy morning at the photocopier. For those in central or local government policy and public relations departments, Twitter may well be an effective communications tool, for many it is likely to be a distraction. The challenge for public sector employers is to manage the use of new technologies in a flexible way so as to benefit from the advantages of new technology without letting productivity suffer. With stories of Council debates being delayed by Twitter, it is clear that it is a challenge that will not be going away (whatever David Cameron thinks).