With social media, employees now have a platform to publicly disagree with or challenge something their employer – your brand – has done. This goes beyond customer service and deep into corporate communications and issues management territory.
I’m guessing you’re very much like me. I spend my days as an in-house communicator, heading communications for the local transit authority known as the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). The TTC carries 1.8 million people daily and employs 14,000. It is in the news regularly and on social media around the clock.
As you know, people rely on transit to get to work, school, medical appointments, social engagements…you name it.
Cities would grind to a halt without public transit. It also is news – big news – be it delays, safety, funding challenges or someone capturing events on buses and trains and sharing them on social media. As public entities, accountable to fare-paying riders who also pay taxes that subsidize transit, that accountability demands that we respond to all media queries, good or bad.
What, then, to do about this new front of employee engagement, where workers publicly respond online to media and social media events that directly challenge the decisions and policies of your organization? Right or wrong and under the cloak of anonymity, a vocal few may take to Twitter and and air grievances or dispute facts with you and your social media team on matters they feel need another voice.
Employees Add Complexity to Social
With accountability for the TTC’s reputation, I engage with my 24,000-plus followers on Twitter, an increasing number of whom are employees, although few will willingly identify as such. While most employees pose little concern, few can have a large influence via social, as you know. Managing issues suddenly has become doubly complex when we add employees to the mix.
This May TTC became the first Canadian transit agency to introduce random drug and alcohol testing of its workforce. The public met the introduction of this procedure with applause; some employee groups were concerned.
Ensuring those in safety sensitive positions are fit for duty is job one in an industry where safety tops the priority list. Random testing for drugs and alcohol looks only for impairment at the time of the test. It uses oral fluid samples, as opposed to blood or urine, to ascertain drug impairment.
A Breathalyzer, similar to that used in roadside police tests, measures alcohol impairment. If someone is a recreational pot smoker or likes a few glasses at wine with dinner, that’s none of our business. Coming to work fit for duty is what we ask.
Crafting a Strategic Plan
Going in, we thought it prudent to make a decision about how to handle news dissemination. TTC arrived at a decision to publish statistics of test results monthly in a public report that contains a host of other operational stats.
If a journalist called to ask about results in the interim, it was agreed that corporate communications would provide an update. Media members, we believed, eventually would shift their attention to other issues as testing and test results became routine.
Understanding how the media works and being strategic in planning is critical in a media-intense industry like transit. Being secretive, we all know, only serves to heighten interest in a difficult situation.
Family Ties? Examples of employee dialogue with the author, as he represented the brand. Source: Toronto Transit Commission
The Unlikely Scenario Occurs
Extraordinarily, on the very first day the TTC began random testing, two employees tested positive; one for alcohol, the other for drugs. It wouldn’t be long, we knew, before a reporter called for an update or comment should the news be leaked.
Two days later, the call came and the story broke. The TTC issued a statement, putting the matter into perspective. The public was concerned at the early positive results. Some employees were upset that information they felt damaged their collective reputation was made public.
The vast majority of workers at TTC, of course, would never come to work impaired, putting their safety, the safety of their co-workers and that of the public at risk. This is an important message that resonates with the public. A vocal few online were decidedly angry, which speaks more to a misunderstanding about the role of media and how communicators operate than anything else [see graphics on page 4].
The Reaction
“Why are you throwing your workers under the bus?” was a common refrain from some online when news broke about the early positive drug and alcohol tests. “Why does the TTC want the public to think we’re all stoned and drunk?” was another.
Some employees also openly questioned the tests’ credibility, suggesting mouthwash or poppy seeds can create false-positive results. (They do not.) Some argued that the tests were a violation of their privacy rights, despite a court ruling to the contrary.
It didn’t matter that a rise in workplace impairment since 2010, identified through post-incident and reasonable cause testing, needed to be brought to an end before a catastrophic event occurred. While not perfect, random testing is a proven deterrent for many.
In addition, it didn’t matter that being silent was neither in the public interest nor something a public entity, like the TTC, could or should keep confidential. For the record, employees who test positive are never identified publicly.
Addressing Employee Concerns
Employees’ sincere and legitimate concerns, raised in any forum, should be listened to and addressed. Turning to online criticism, PR best practice holds that it should be met with facts and treated professionally. In other words, address it directly, though it is a different situation when criticism morphs into personal attacks and the trolls come out and trash your company and identifiable staff.
Ignore the trolls, yes, mute and block as appropriate, sure, but push back with facts, correct false statements and remember that everything you tweet is quotable and official.
Taking on controversial issues directly with customers and employees alike is something an accountable, senior communicator ought to do. You won’t convince everyone or win any popularity contests with straightforward engagement. People online can be particularly blunt, which gives you license, in my view, to do the same.
As I’ve written before ( PR News, Apr. 17, 2017), we need to be H.O.T. – honest, open and transparent – in all that we do. We don’t do our employers, customers or workers any favors when we’re silent or opaque in our replies. Explain, don’t defend, and help those genuinely interested to better understand what you do and why.
Long-term Thinking Needed
Big issues tend also to be long-term issues. Employee satisfaction scores may suffer in the early going, but doing what is right, recognizing employees are online and will respond and react, is an important consideration for issues managers and employee communications professionals.
The media may watch all this unfold from the online sidelines and see the grinding axes for what it is, but they’re also watching for missteps. Don’t be the story.
CONTACT: [email protected] @bradTTC
How to Handle Employee Criticism on Social
You have a burning issue that’s caught fire online and some of your employees are giving it life. What to do:
- Honor free speech
- Be respectful and professional, calling out those who fail to do the same
- Correct factual errors
- Challenge misperceptions
- Take specific, personal concerns offline
- Mute, block and report abuse and harassment
- Have perspective, a vocal few usually don’t represent the massesBe prepared, a vocal few may very well represent the masses
- Issue a How Communications Works primer to employees to build trust and understanding
- Social media strategies must consider the workforce