While employee misconduct in the workplace and on work-related events may be relatively straightforward for employers to deal with, what is the legal position when an employee acts in a manner that their employer deems inappropriate on his or her own time?

Marc Garlasco, a senior military analyst with the American human rights organisation Human Rights Watch, has been suspended from his position while his hobby of collecting Nazi and other war memorabilia is investigated. Tom Porteous, the London director of the Human Rights Watch, is currently reviewing Garlasco’s blogs to determine if any remarks have been made which may bring the organisation into disrepute.

It can be difficult to determine when a worker’s private pastimes become an issue that affects their employment. In general, most large organisations will make it plain in their contracts of employment that employees have a duty not to adversely affect their employer’s business or reputation by their conduct outside of working hours.

However, as Juliet Carp, an employment solicitor with the firm Speechly Bircham, explains: “In practice, problems often arise where the employment documents do not clearly prohibit the offending activities … that the employee’s activity may be embarrassing or silly is unlikely to be enough, unless of course there is some special reason why the employee’s public image is critical for the employer.”

Rachel Dineley, head of diversity and discrimination with the law firm Beachcroft, advised that: “Employers must not overreact when learning about an employee’s hobby. The first job is to investigate whether it impinges on his or her work. If it does, employers need to be proportionate in the sanctions they impose.

“My advise to employees is - don’t be naive and assume your private life is necessarily private, particularly if you use the Internet … Think carefully before you do anything rash because it could come home to roost and it may not be worth losing your job over.”

Technorati Tags: Employment Law, Worker's Rights