Fired for Taking a Photograph

An employee for the Drury Hotel chain was fired for taking a broad-scene picture of marked Department of Homeland Security vehicles in the hotel's parking garage and then posting the picture on Facebook. The location is about 30 miles away from Ferguson, Missouri. He was subsequently fired.

http://www.cnn.com …oyee/index.html​?hpt=hp_t2

The hotel says the employee was fired because they take the privacy and security of their guests seriously. From my initial perspective, I understand the company's concerns. I suppose guests should not be bothered by hotel employees while staying at a hotel. For example, if Brett Favre were to stay at a hotel, would it be right for an employee to take a picture of his car and post it online? From the perspective of the hotel chain, guests should be able to stay at the hotel without being singled out by their employees.

On the other hand, some would say that a person has a constitutional right to take photographs. True, but I think the two keys differences are:

1) The photograph was taken by an employee
2) I assume the picture was taken on private property (an assumption on my part since it was inside a parking garage)

Had the picture been taken from a public street and not taken by the hotel's employee, then obviously there is nothing wrong with taking a photograph.

What are your thoughts? Please try to keep this discussion civil and non-political in nature. Let's discuss what a person should be able to do with a camera and what they should not be able to do with a camera. In your opinion, was it right for the hotel to fire the employee in this situation?

Bryan

#2, case closed. We take advantage of being able to shoot in public so we should be held responsible for taking shots in private property.

People have a tendancy to be far to free with what they post on social media.
There are few laws governing this, there is only the school of hard knocks, and the vast majority of actual penalty comes directly from employers and or schools (the number of suspensions and expulsions relating to social media.

I am pretty much always likely to come down on the side of photographers rights, but what this guy did is just plain stupid and asking for trouble with his employer.

Your point about Brett favre hits a nerve as well, though I don't work with sports stars, I do work with famous musicians and performers. As a back stage employee and employer, my crew KNOWS that this sort of behavior is forbidden in the work place.

Provided the hotel had an existing social media policy for employees they were justified. Im sure the employee thought he was acting in the role of citizen journalist, but that conflicted with his employer's goal of guest privacy.

Yep, although if the account of the firing is true, that was completely unprofessional and the Hotel should be ashamed of that behavior. In this case the employer had grounds for the termination - an employee took photos of the vehicles of guests, which compromises guest privacy, which is something they take seriously. Additionally it was taken on private property.

Govt entity Vs Private entity is another view point too look at this from which leads to slippery yet defined slope, as what the govt is up too especially domestically should be a matter of public record and comment. Though I agree if the kid violated company policy then he should suffer the consequences, as there were many other ways to get these images out there than to post it to Social Media.

It strikes me that the hotel management might be concerned for their security, as well as that of their guests.

It would seem to me that the "spirit" of the photo as well as the the posting might have some influence.

Was the photo made to point out that the vehicles (and thus the occupants) were well away from the action - or was the photo taken to point out specifically where they were (possibly for targeting?).

I can see where the hotel management might object to not only the photograph being taken, but certainly the "sharing" of it on social media. Also it would be interesting to know exactly what the conversation between the employee and hotel management might have been. The employee's motives for the photo and for "sharing" may have been the cause of his dismissal and not the actual taking of the photo, but what his intentions were when he posted it, and perhaps a refusal to take it down?

Hillbille

He (the X-employee) says that he just wanted to know WHY the vehicles were there?

I would think that the reason for their being there is obvious - at least it certainly is to about 250 million or more other people.

Hillbille

Hillbille wrote in post #17280140
Was the photo made to point out that the vehicles (and thus the occupants) were well away from the action - or was the photo taken to point out specifically where they were (possibly for targeting?).

This was my first thought. The employee appears to be quite suspicious, even if his intentions were innocent. He was foolish not to realize this.

Yes I had the thought almost immediately and really became suspicious when he stated that he was born and raised in Ferguson. Red flags a waving!!

Hillbille

He's either being intentionally obtuse or perhaps he's part of the black helicopte crowd who see conspiracy evereverywhere.

Hey! Just because he's paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get him!

And if they weren't, they are now.

+1,000,000 LOL!!

I have a feeling - if there are any unfiled 1040's in his past, or any unpaid parking tickets, he's better use his separation pay to get all caught up!

Hillbille

Ok, it sounds like most folks agree with me. He violated the ethics behind his job (and his company's policy) and he should have thought before his actions.

It seems to me that the immediacy of social media has gotten several people in trouble. People need to slow down at times and think about their actions.

Cheers,
Bryan

Although the company was within their rights to fire him, I really don't have a problem with what he did. The law enforcement/security community is entirely too opaque and secretive for my liking. That said, he was an idiot for posting it on an identifiable account. Best to share things like that anonymously.