Up until a week ago, sixty-three year old Gene Morphis was perhaps unknown to many of us on this side of the pond. For those like me, who did not know him, Morphis had, since October 2010, been the CFO of fashion retailer, Francesca’s Holding Corp, a Houston-based, public company. He earned some US$566,720 ($49 million) in 2011 and US$1.2 million in 2010. Before that he had held similar CFO positions, at David’s Bridal and the Rowe Companies. That aside, our friend Morphis was like some of you, an avid social media user, merrily tweeting and posting information about his family, work and interests, casually keeping us abreast of his doings. Today, though he no longer works for Franscea having been fired because of some of his postings and tweets. Gene seemed to have crossed the ‘line’.

There are many sandy shoals and choppy seas to navigate when it comes to a company policy on social media. How much can employees say about their employers? What is the line over which you cannot cross? As I read the story posted on May 14 on the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), I wondered if our good friend Mr Morphis had ever examined the company’s social media policy that would have set out guidelines and advised employees, such as he was, about what information was permissible for posting on social media networks and what was strictly forbidden. I don’t think he read all the way through to the fine print.

Let us understand this very clearly, it is not that Gene had gone about willy-nilly posting scads of scandalous, nefarious or overtly damaging information about the company. No sireee. According to the WSJ, “Mr Morphis has maintained a publicly viewable profile on Facebook, authored a blog called “Morph’s View” and maintained a Twitter account under the handle “theoldcfo.” Online, he discussed everything from Christmas to college basketball, and occasionally company doings. It was those posts that landed him in trouble.” What were the hot-button posts that led our hero to his firing: “On March 6, for instance, he tweeted: “Dinner w/Board tonite. Used to be fun. Now one must be on guard every second.” The following day, he posted “Board meeting. Good numbers = Happy Board.”; On March 13, Mr Morphis posted on Facebook about a company earnings call: “Earnings released. Conference call completed. How do you like me now Mr Shorty?”

Months earlier, on December 5, he posted about another investor call. “Cramming for earnings call like a final. I thought I had outgrown that…” Could it be that Morphis had stepped on the mysterious (and obviously powerful) ‘Shorty’s’ toes just that one time, and that caused him to be led unceremoniously to the chopping block? It could very well be, considering some of the over-sized egos which typically envelope board rooms across the globe. Or perhaps it is that our hapless hero was warned and choose to ignore the memos. I don’t know about you, but I secretly sympathize with ‘Morphy’, after all isn’t it true that on any given day just love to kvetch about our jobs. We wish our bosses would go on sudden and unexplained long leave of absence perhaps near to war-torn regions. Which one of us have not harboured the thought of doing exactly what he did, perhaps particularly after a rough day at the office.

In a statement, Greg Brenneman, chairman of Francesca’s board of directors said, “We are disappointed by this situation but we expect our executives to comply with all company policies.”

Social media is still a relatively murky and un-developed area on which to apply policies and procedures. In fact according to the article, ” Only about 40 per cent of employers have formal social-media policies, according to a survey of 470 companies released this year by the Society for Human Resource Management. Of those companies with policies, a third have taken disciplinary action against an employee in the past year, the survey found.”

Many companies with social media policies require employees to state that their views are their own, not their company’s, or abide by nondisclosure rules regarding sensitive company information, the article quoted Eric B Meyer, an employment lawyer in Philadelphia with Dilworth Paxson LLP. He recommended that firms provide guidance to employees-particularly more senior staff, who may not be aware of the latest social media tools-about setting appropriate privacy settings on sites like Facebook.

On the other hand, continued concern about employers asking applicants and employees for their passwords to social media sites has led to the introduction of a federal bill to prohibit the practice. On April 27, 2012, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-NY, introduced the Social Networking Online Protection Act (SNOPA). SNOPA would prohibit employers from requiring a username, password or other access to online content. It would not allow employers to demand such access to discipline, discriminate or deny employment and would bar employers from disciplining individuals who refuse to volunteer such information.

This relatively new area of communications has the potential to open up a can of worms for the uninitiated and those without information. Our best advice: seek knowledge and guidance.

Yvonne Grinam-Nicholson, (MBA, ABC) is a Business Communications Consultant with ROCommunications Jamaica, specializing in business communications and financial publications. She can be contacted at: yvonne@rocommunications.com. Visit her website at www.rocommunications.com and post your comments.