HW for 4/8

One of the important points from this week's reading is the issue of freedom of speech or expression. As American's we are all entitled to our right of freedom of speech, yet when we work for certain companies, that expression is not technically free anymore. Barry explains that employers have an abundant power for controlling the expressive activities of their employees. If silencing an employee's concerns will advance the company's economic interests, it is without a doubt that employer's will get rid of the employee over sacrificing a business deal. As the article shows the ridiculousness of people getting fired from their jobs based on freedom of speech via a bumper sticker, it points to the larger issue of just how free are we? If we cannot even have stickers that represent our thoughts, how can we feel comfortable voicing our opinion to a person of authority? This issue is important because it shows us that when we agree to work for certain companies, arguably not all, that we are sacrificing our freedom of speech in that we cannot outwardly speak up to our employers. They have the ability to release us from our position if we do not agree to a type of 'employee' speech. This atmosphere makes it so 'free speech' on and off the job are completely different things. In understanding this, people should better research the companies they are considering working for with the hopes that they will not find themselves in one that highly constricts their freedom of expression. As I see myself as a very outspoken and opinionated person, I am pretty sure that I would fail in a workplace that puts consequences on their employee's for certain uses of speech. With employer's having the ability to fire workers for nearly any reason, the workplace becomes an inhospitable environment. However, there are many places that free speech is valued and encouraged- companies that place creativity on a high level. As I know this, I will probably look to work in either the public relations or event planning fields where I can maximize my thoughts and communication skills that I have retained through college.

A second big point from the readings comes from the Robinson article about the inhumane treatment of workers. "Working hard goes with the territory, but you don't have to be a whipping post". Workers take unlawful treatment from their employers for the sake of saving the job, however also because they are unaware of what is stipulated in 'workplace' law to being with. You are not just salaried because you are paid by the month, rather you must meet a certain income standard. Working overtime requires being paid for overtime hours- it is not your duty as a worker to give those 'free' hours. People take abuse for the hopes of a promotion, yet at some point (as described in the article), they begin to fight back and stand up for themselves. In realizing the intense pressure that can be placed on us by our employer's, we must be able to protect ourselves and our human rights so that we are not taken advantage of. If people come together and realize that these employer violations are occurring everywhere, they will not only be able to help themselves, but also make a difference in people's lives so that workers can essentially 'have a life'. Going back to articles we have read in the beginning of the semester, I remember commenting on one about employee treatment and how that is one of the key things when choosing a company to work for. This article capitalizes on this issue as well as showing all of the frightening things that can go wrong when working for a company that does not value the personal lives of their employees.  As what is described here is a general problem, it does enough to make me aware of the problem that can ensue in certain companies. Knowing this, it is even more crucial to survey employee benefits as well as insurance and bonus packages that come along with your jobs. I considered applying for a job, however rescinded my application when it stipulated there would only be 5 'off' days the entire year. To some, that might be a big deal, however to me it was a huge sign that I could not work for a company as strict as that one and I would probably be working under a very strict management team.

The lecture from Bruce Barry was very interesting and brought up a lot of important points about free speech in the workplace. As he elaborated on what our assigned reading was, he brought up 4 questions that are relevant to asking yourself when you are an employee: Public or Private, What kind of speech, Who do you work for and where do you work? In answering these questions as an employee, you will better understand what rights you do and do not have in the American workplace. Essentially, it comes down to the reality that we are guaranteed very few rights in the workplace and even fewer when we work for a private company. Understanding constitutional law in combination with employment law encompasses the reasons of why employers are allowed to 'fire us'. Despite it being morally wrong in some circumstances, the 'employment-at-will' principle allows employers to discharge employees for virtually any reason- reasons separate from race and religion that is. However, if we work in certain states such as California and New York, we are granted more rights as employees because those individual states have made laws regarding that. Also, if working for the government, hence a public entity, our first amendment right is completely protected and our speech will not be constrained. The discussion made me think a lot about the difference between legal issues and moral issues and what I would do if I found myself in one of the situations explained. As an employer, would I fire someone because of a bumper sticker? No. If I had factual proof that an employee was engaging in out of work behavior that was harming my business? Yes. In thinking about the difference of morality and legality, I also think it depends a a significant amount on what you believe in as an individual. If I was laid back type of person in general and did not care about my employees' out of work habits- then I would turn a blind eye to their behavior. Yet, if I were a meticulously strict boss and became so involved in the lives of my employees', than I would probably be angered by some of their behaviors and would exercise my employment-at-will right far too often.

A second important point from class came from the 2nd group presentation. Synergy is an important concept as when you work together in groups, you produce better results than if you worked alone. Synergistic communication can be very helpful in classrooms and business- people work together and come up with better ideas than their initial individual ones. Understanding the importance of synergy allows people to be better at comprising and understanding the other people in their group. Also, it is easy to bring about negative synergy so it is especially important to put in a lot of effort to getting to know the people you are working with so you produce positive ideas together. Productive group work also discourages people from always believing that they alone are always right and fighting for their own ideas vs. the synergistic efforts of the group. Through past internship experiences and being included in on company meetings, I have better understood the power of synergistic work. One of my internships rarely had company meetings and the boss made all of the decisions instead of consulting with the thoughts of the employees. As an intern, it was even apparent that some of their downfalls resulted from lack of communication within the group (company). A summer later, I worked with a clothing company where they had inter-group events all of the time for feedback and ideas- public relations would talk to sales, design to marketing etc. A combination of all of those different creative minds made for a better outcome and hence for money for the company. People who didn't work in specific departments were actually really able to help them out as they had a fresher outlook/newer perspective.