Perspective: I was fired for blogging

My name is Ellen Simonetti, but I am better known to Web surfers as the Queen of Sky.

I had been a flight attendant for Delta Air Lines for almost eight years when I started my blog, or online diary, in January of this year. I entitled it "Diary of a Flight Attendant."

On Saturday, Sept. 25, I came home to flashing messages on my answering machine.

"Ellen, I need you to call me back. It's about your trip tomorrow," repeated the urgent-sounding voice on the tape.

The voice was that of a Delta Air Lines in-flight supervisor. I immediately dialed the number on the messages, thinking perhaps my Rome flight the next day had been cancelled. What the supervisor told me, however, left me shocked and sick to my stomach.

The reason I started my blog in the first place was as a form of therapy.

"You won't be able to fly your trip tomorrow...it's about some pictures on the Web."

I had to wait more than a week after that phone call to meet with Delta management and find out exactly what was going on. During that very long week, I lived in suspense in my humble Austin, Texas, apartment and prepared for the worst. I assumed I would be fired, so I started consulting with lawyers and other people.

That was when I began to hear stories about people like Heather B. Armstrong, of dooce.com, who was fired because of her blog in 2002. Then there was "the Washingtonienne," who was fired earlier this year because of comments she entered in her blog.

As my story spread on the Web, I started receiving all kinds of e-mails from people on both sides of the Atlantic that employer blog backlash had gotten to. One, a comedian who wished to remain anonymous, told me she was fired from her day job after making a joke about co-workers on her blog.

I have decided to continue to blog and spread my story about employer blog backlash.

The very first thing I did after the phone call from Delta was delete all of the photographs from my blog that I thought my employer could possibly have a problem with. That included all of the pictures of me and fellow crew members posing in Delta Air Lines uniforms.

It was not until the meeting with human resources and my supervisor on Wednesday, Oct. 6, that I learned the official reason for my suspension: "inappropriate" pictures. The unofficial reason (implied through an intimidating interrogation): blogging.

The reason I started my blog in the first place was as a form of therapy. I had lost my mother in September 2003 to cancer and that hit me hard. It was much easier to write about my feelings than talk about them. Now, my employer was telling me that the very thing that had gotten me through those tough times, my blog, could cost me my career. I felt my rights were being infringed upon. And I decided to fight back.

After that meeting, I went home and got online and found plenty of pictures of male Delta Air Lines employees in uniform on the Web. I then searched for a specific company policy prohibiting posting pictures on the Web or blogging, which I could not find.

I had an excellent employment record with Delta Air Lines and had never been previously disciplined. Therefore, I find it odd that I was not at least given a warning before my suspension. I am still trying to figure out why I was singled out. In fact, two days after that meeting with Delta Air Lines management, I filed a sex discrimination complaint with the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Delta Air Lines.

Then, on Oct. 29, 2004, three weeks after I filed that discrimination complaint, I received a call from my supervisor. He advised me over the phone that my employment with Delta Air Lines had been terminated due to "inappropriate pictures in uniform on the Web."

I have decided to continue to blog and spread my story about employer blog backlash. If it is to be defeated, we all have to stand up to this silent and arbitrary foe, one that should never again be allowed to rear its ugly head.

Biography
Ellen Simonetti, aka "Queen of Sky," is appealing to Delta Air Lines to get her job as a flight attendant back. In the meantime, she continues to write her Web log.

More Perspectives

You didn't deserve it but you shouldn't whine

It's a clumsy move by Delta, but it's hardly sex discrimination, nor is it unreasonable. If Ellen can make a living out of posing and pouting (or wants to) then, great, go for it I say! She's attractive, personable, and young (or at least, still in her 20s, which in today's youth-hysteric culture is almost young)

But if she has plans that involved being salaried or don't involve bare flesh, then she must bear in mind that future employers may have to consider how she's now reacting in the public gaze.

Personally, I'd recommend dropping *any* legal action. People (and that includes business sponsors in the future) will be impressed with her ability to smile demurely and say (& do) little or nothing about Delta. She should look to the future. Indeed, if she hadn't publicly mentioned legal action, she might even have enticed Delta's PR department to rehire her as a spokeswoman.

Rule 1: Don't Make Enemies!

Andrew Denny
PR exec, Norfolk, England.

www.grannybuttons.com

[OlShue]

If you don't have enemies, you're doing nothing worthwhile

Not that I should expect anything more from a spineless PR exec like yourself.

[dougbunger]

Free Advice is Worth What You Pay For It

You say she didn't deserve it, but shouldn't whine.

Let's see if that advice holds true in other real world situations: If you're robbed, you didn't deserve it, but you shouldn't call the police so people will respect you for being strong. No, that didn't work. Lets try a few more.

If you're company demands that you work on Saturday without compensation, you shouldn't whine, but do whatever they tell you because it is your privilege to work for them. Still not sure your theory works. Lets try a more extreme case. Surely that will work.

The American Negro didn't deserve to be enslaved, but they shouldn't have whined about it, but accepted their fate. The German Jews didn't deserve to be exterminated, but they shouldn't have whined, but accepted their fate. Still nothing.

You know: Either you didn't think your comment through, or you've really been beaten into submission.

Fight, Queen of Sky, Fight!

What an A**!

Why shouldn't she fight back? Calling it "whining" is a red herring. It's an elitist comment, and "bending over to take it" won't solve a thing. People have a right to live their life. I am a business owner, and I feel privileged to work with great people. As long as their personal business doesn't affect mine, they can do whatever they feel like doing.

In my experience, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. In my experience, those who complain about others ?whining? usually are the ones doing most of the whining. Pathetic!

Rock on, Ellen! You are my Queen of the Sky!

[jlaustill]

Wow, such ignorance amazes me!!!

First off, you have obviously enjoyed way to much freedom your entire life. Second off, wow.

This girl is doing the work of hero's, standing up for personal freedom, which is the single most important aspect of a free trade economy to function properly. You should spend some time with your nose in an economics book, then an ethics book, then re-evaluate what you think about a companies right to use personal life any way they want.

once again, wow, ignorance is bliss

Typical

First of all, if there is a problem with the amount of flesh that QoS is showing, whose fault is that? She has in no way modified her flight attendant outfit. The idea that it is appropriate and even desireable for women to show so much and men to show so little is grounds for a sex discrimination suit on it's own merit. Second, if QoS is unable to get hired at some place because of anything she has done on her blog, then she really doesn't want to work there anyway. Only the typical Neanderthals who seem to have taken over from sensitive guys like me would've written your response. Never fear, women of the world...there ARE guys who understand.

[Bob/Paul]

Sue Sue Sue

"Personally, I'd recommend dropping *any* legal action. People (and that includes business sponsors in the future) will be impressed with her ability to smile demurely and say (& do) little or nothing about Delta. She should look to the future. Indeed, if she hadn't publicly mentioned legal action, she might even have enticed Delta's PR department to rehire her as a spokeswoman."

People will NOT be impressed (some might, apparently you will) by her just taking this, but just ignoring this won't make delta or anyone else from doing this again. Saying that this is a "clumsy move" by delta and then not doing anything about it is like saying that a child who kicked a cat should NOT have kicked it, but then not telling the child they were wrong.

How were the pictures inappropriate? Because she was in uniform, apparently, and obviously they have no problem with people in uniform as they've allowed other Delta Airlines members to post their pictures (she commented men, but I've seen some women as well)

This may or may not be sexual discrimination, but it's most definately some sort of discrimination. I'd seek to find others in the same situation and file a class action suit

Wow

"People (and that includes business sponsors in the future) will be impressed with her ability to smile demurely and say (& do) little or nothing about Delta."

Smile Demurely? People have been saying crap like this to women for too long. When was the last time you told a man to smile demurely and say and do nothing about being unjustly fired? You know what people will be impressed with? If she goes and kicks Delta in the nuts and gets compensated for this crap.

You deserved it !!!

Hey you thinking of yourself as queen of sky, get some decent job. I think you deserved it. And what is all this whining about. If you dont like something just give it up. You dont need to be in that company and whin about it and that too in its uniform.
Give me a break.

Easy shortcut to fame !!!

What I think is easy and cheap shortcut to fame.

Cheap shortcut !!!

Showing your provocative pictures in your uniform is certainly not acceptable. Instead act in some films where you dont need uniform. ;)

Hey Andrew PR is another abbreviation for loser!

Andrew You have no clue what a flight attendant goes through, nor the services we provide. Very many are highyly educated people and don't deserve this adverse treatment. She should press her case for the simple fact that it's impeeding on right to free speech, even though Delta will never admit to that. I'm assuming you're a Brit, and it just figures that you are willing to lie down and take it in the ass. Let's face it the great nation of England did just that when 13 small colonies revolted against a "Deltaesque" King. He would have made a great CEO for Delta. You need to grab the bottom of your neck and pull sharply to dislodge your head from your ass. I know it's hard because most english people can't see the forest from the tree's, but you have to try. Then maybe you'll understand that if flight attendants don't fight back against things like this it will be only the beginning of our speech infringements. Don't take this the wrong way Andrew, but you are commenting on a subject of which you know nothing about.

[dj41326]

Protect Yourself.

Imagine an Englishman stating a young American female should not fight for her right to prevent discrimination.The previous is sort of like when the English did not want the Colonies to stand up against unrepresented taxation. Again you can see in his comment how he supports discrimination by bringing up the attractiveness of the femal instead of mentioning her courage in fighting a large corporation. You see in England discrimination is not a big deal. Anti-semitism is on the rise there so it is not suprising that an Englishman would post some sort of blog like this. Bottom line a blog should not get you fired. It is your personal time and your webspace not the companies. You should have a right to post whatever you want on your blog regardless of what anyone says except the ISP. If we let these travesties continue then what next, would we have to mind our speech during conversations at home? To let this roll off of your back is insane. Litigation is the only way. The public gaze should only be relevant if you are defaming your country or commiting a crime. Future employers may be impressed by cowarding in a corner and accepting defeat? This sir is non-sense. Employers will see you as a pushover and treat you as such. Making a mark and being a trailblazer is what being American is all about. If she does not stand for something, she will fall for anything.

[dj41326]

Protect Yourself.

Imagine an Englishman stating a young American female should not fight for her right to prevent discrimination. The previous is sort of like when the English did not want the Colonies to stand up against unrepresented taxation. Again you can see in his comment how he supports discrimination by bringing up the attractiveness of the female instead of mentioning her courage in fighting a large corporation. You see in England discrimination is not a big deal. Anti-Semitism is on the rise there so it is not surprising that an Englishman would post some sort of blog like this. Bottom line a blog should not get you fired. It is your personal time and your web space not the companies. You should have a right to post whatever you want on your blog regardless of what anyone says except the ISP. If we let these travesties continue then what next, would we have to mind our speech during conversations at home? To let this roll off of your back is insane. Litigation is the only way. The public gaze should only be relevant if you are defaming your country or committing a crime. Future employers may be impressed by cowering in a corner and accepting defeat? This sir is non-sense. Employers will see you as a pushover and treat you as such. Making a mark and being a trailblazer is what being American is all about. If she does not stand for something, she will fall for anything.

[ordaj]

Coporations are supplanting church and state...

...as the major dictators of principles. That is, those that dictate what people see, hear, and can do. They have undue influence and are gaining more. When you cross the corporate doorstep, you enter into a dictatorship and check your rights at the door.

[katazina]

Why does nobody get this?

Blogging is defacto publishing. If you are writing about your place of employment, the management, your coworkers, or company policies, you risk the ire of the company. To posit that you have been victimized becuase you knowingly published jokes, criticisms, or other commentary about your place of employment, and further, willinging identified yourself as the author, is nothing short of immature and ludicrous. If you wrote, and then circulated, a memo that said the same you'd be disciplined or fired. Your job is not an entitlement, it is a contract between you and your employer. Your understanding of the context of your actions is extremely naive. You gambled your job and you lost. No one else is to blame.

[cupofkona]

Censorship is alive and infesting like a cancer

What you do when not on the job is your right and what they did
and are doing is abusing your freedom of speech. They do not
have to like it. Call it the price of doing business. It is none of
their business. I get it. But it seems others do not. Corporations
are not living beings! And we thinking mortals have rights that
supercede theirs. Period. I already live in a country that is
gearing up for more thought control. But we still, at this time,
anyway, have the right to think and say what we feel, if at least,
on our own time. But this event shows that they are working
hard to kill this right due to their (corporations) alleged feelings.
Hey, corporations can NOT have feelings! Just provide a service
and stay out of peoples lives. Even if they bad-mouth the
company on their own time.

David Letterman..

Hell, he bashes his own company on THEIR time for entertainment. What's the difference?

[chulcoop]

Queen Of Sky Fired Me For Blogging

Queen Of Sky Fired Me For Blogging
Posted by: Cliff Hulcoop
Posted on: March 30, 2005, 1:17 PM PST
Story: I was fired for blogging
My name is Cliff Hulcoop, but I am better known as one of Queen Of Sky's biggest critics on her blog.

As blogs generally encourage feedback, I had been commenting on her blog for almost 5 months on Journalspace. The blog was entitled "Diary of a Flight Attendant."

Very recently, she made her journalspace journal moderated so she could filter comments that were positive of her cause. However she left her Guestbook Open.

I found out that she was selling a Harcore Pornography site on her blog. While the site, SWYDM looks innocent, and is still referenced in her main blog, she was advertising it on the left hand side and encouraging concerned parents that it was just a friendster site and they had nothing to worry about.

It is in fact a hardcore pornography site. Out of fairness to QofS I not only joined it for free but actually find out and to be fair. Once I found out what I did I then emailed Queen Of Sky direct to give her Fair Warning that she was duping her readership. She did take the link down, but kept her original comments and in her own blog continues to maintain it is just a friendster comment on my appearance type site.

I exposed her for this in the Guestbook as at that time she was putting the name and home address of the then owner of QueenOfSky.com (not the journal) onto her journal as well as his personal telephone number.

I thought this was going a bit far. I then exposed her as a hypocrite for selling the hardcore porn site SYWDM.

She then got a new guestbook and then what happened next really shocked me.

I went to the guestbook and it said I was banned. Quite why I do not know. All I ever did was express a differnet opinion to QofS and showed discrepancies between her different posts. I showed what she said in one show was different to what she would say on her blog in another part. And it was full of inconsistencies.

Initially I felt sorry for her. I thought she was naive and needed advice.

I had to wait more than a week after that before she started a video blog. I could comment on that so I did. During the week she banned me from there again, for daring to reveal the truth. Just look at http://queenofsky.blogs.com and look at each entry. I am known as chulcoop.

Around that time I began to hear stories from other people who also thought she was a deceitful lying cow. There was QQofSS, JumpbackJim and others that felt she was not being entirely honest with her readership.

While I could handle her having a different point of view, she did not seem to even be consistent about what had happened in the past.

She tore down lots of pages from her blog. She claims it was to help other JS users so bandwidth would not be used as much. In fact she was trying to destory the evidence.

As my story had spread , I started receiving e-mails from people who realised I was right. I even received comments from people who were once on QofS's side until they realised the horrible truth.

On both sides of the Atlantic she was ridiculed and exposed.

What is most upsetting is that QofS claims to be fighting for Freedom of Speech yet on her own video blog she claims in a direct reply to me (on one of the very few (i think 2) posts she allowed) that she thinks Freedom Of Speech is about allowing me to criitise her on my blog not hers. Fine then why did she set it up in the first place?

And when I tried to show a comparison between why she claims her First Amendment Rights were violated because Delta did not like her posing on their plane and calling their customers Old Bags and taking photos of them at her workplace, and how she was talking about limiting what she felt were my rights to critise her, she banned the post. Then she banned me.

It was not until I got to work after an Easter Holiday that I found out that she had only banned me from posting on her video blog and accessing the Guestbook as I could do these things from work in my lunch break.

Clearly, QofS was not happy about "Inappropriate Comments" i.e. critising her. It does, to be fair, on QofS's (as indeed any JS blog) say that Inappropriate comments could lead to termination of the right to commment.

I once asked her on her blog what was inappropriate. She said that anyone named Cliff (that is me) that posted "their stupid comments more than 3 times may get banned". Well she did eventually.

I think she cannot bear for others to reveal the truth about her.

I dont not mind naivity. And even I am not naive enough not to expect some deceit. But she seemed and seems to be conning well meaning people who are genuinely trying to help her. I did at first. I treid to offer her life lessons but she did not want to read my "long boring posts" which pretty much predicted what would happen in advance.

I think me exposing her as a pornographer was more than she could bear. All she had to do on her blog was aplologise and say she did not know the SWYDM site was a porn site. But apology is something she cannot do. She is ALWAYS right.

I have decided to try to expose QofS for what she is. She now deletes posts from anyone disagreeing with her. Even on The Committee To Protect Bloggers blog which is a communal log shared with others. She leaves a few in for good measure.

But as I was throughout, her biggest critic and journalistically destroyed her, she has decided that Freedom of Speech has a price. Delta did not like what she did.

And it appears she cannot take the truth when exposed by me.

Cliff Hulcoop.

culture shift

Yes, I don't get it either -- people are more willing to live in
public than ever before, but expect it to have no impact to the
things that they write about.

This reminds me of the Friendster case: if you write something
about a business decision, and then a tech journalist picks up
your blog post and quotes it in an article about such business
decisions, isn't it then your fault that this opinion is being
distributed by an industry magazine to readers (and maybe
investors) all around the world?

Blogging *is* publishing, that's the beauty of it, but you can't
ignore the influence publishing carries. If you can't just keep a
paper journal in your backpack to write these kinds of things
down, then don't write about your work or workplace. Seriously.
This is why people who report on companies and their behaviors
usually do so anonymously--because other people *are*
listening.

Have we started adding communications/journalism classes in
high schools yet?

was reply to Roger

sorry, this was a reply to Roger's post -- CNet, you guys really
need Previews in these forums...

[bdennis410]

Ellen's Blog - tough luck

While I feel sorry about Ellen losing her job, I have to wonder if she was somehow blind to the transition in her blog from consolation blog for her terrible loss of her mother to a rant n' rave blog about Delta.
If it was intended to be personal, she shouldn't have been in uniform, but the reason she was in uniform, was to somehow lend credibility to herself and the blog.
She is paying a high price for her personal speech,a price I have the impression is deserved.
Regardless of the legality, no company should have to keep employees so disloyal that they go public and the company is powerless.
If Delta is sued and they lose, I hope it doesn't reduce their resolve to treat employees fairly, but not have to suffer whiners and complainers on the payroll, poisoning morale. Delta could even benfit from setting up their own blog for employees to "rant n rave." They may not like the results, may even already suspect what employees are going to say, but that doesn't make it less valuable. The airline industry continues to suffer from management decisions to expand in spite of reduced ROI, and justify the bankruptcies and other financial messes as a result of employee cost. It is just not true.
But that's a subject for my own rant n' rave.
You know, it amazes me that when people get caught with their pants down, they don't want to take responsibility for their action, preferring instead to blame others. I can only suggest that people be aware of the consequences of their actions.

If the lines aren't drawn...

How can you possibly know where they are? They apparenly had no explicit policy about "appropriate use of pictures" and she didn't even get a warning beforehand. This is akin to getting a speeding ticket on a road with no posted speed limits, isn't it? Yes it's obvious when you're WAY over any reasonable limit but with nothing posted there's a huge grey area.

Disloyal?

Grrrr.... this response makes me growl. Ellen is coming into work, or was, regularly, performing her job professionally. This is the loyalty that any employer has the right to ask. The idea that this loyalty has any business extending past the workday, unless specific areas of contracted concern such as security are involved, is exactly what's wrong with the American culture today. Corporations and businesses are NOT the end all of authorities. They are how we make a living to do the things we do in the rest of our lives, and that is all. If QoS (okay, Ellen, but I really liked the Queen of Sky moniker) had said anything that was untrue, it would've been illegal. If she had spread company secrets, say, giving anyone who called in passenger manifests of specific flights, then she would've broken company policy, possibly the law, in this case. But for her to "rant" about how she feels about work is totally her right. If her employer can't take it, then I suggest it develop thicker skin, or, more appropriately, look at what Ellen is saying and perhaps, shock of shocks, do that seldom used management tool and listen to its employees and perhaps make changes that make the workplace better.

Next time use your head.

Ellen is a perfect example of employment Darwinism.

[cupofkona]

Companies as goons

This is no different than company goons knocking on your door
with baseball bats in hand. You are fired and your life a mess
and you can not fight back against their might. Gotta love the
new AMERICA. Yippie for the poor corporations and too bad for
the individual now fired. This means all the work by union
people for better everything were wrong. And they did it on the
job!

Mixed feelings

What she did was not completely right, nor is her deluded whinings after the fact. As an aside, you are not good looking, get over yourself. She did go too far, but did she deserve to be fired? I am not sure.

I have had to deal with crappy management, and I did so without getting fired and I got positive results. You have to keep things private until you can't any longer, and then go public carefully.

Part of me feels sorry for her, because she is obviously unable to deal with issues maturely and intelligently, so she got burned. What she needs to do is learn from this, grow up, and move on. A few other posters are correct, if she makes too big of a noise she will likely never get a decent job again. Standing up for yourself is one thing, that makes enemies, but it also brings you respect from others. Jumping up and down like a petulant child impresses no one.

[jacklg0]

who is really whining here?

Seems to me the CORPORATION is the one whining about being talked about.. and cannot get it's act together to TALK to an employee or accept critical comment of any kind. If they want to make rules about what an employee can do if their off hours, then let the employees know before they work there, and let them fight it out in courts when they are sued PRE-employment for violating laws and regulations that apply to CORPORATIONS. Somebody there is taking it personally and hiding and whining in a corporate manner....

[sdencar]

There isn't a company in the world

That would allow an employee to use the uniform to pose for pictures that had nothing to do with their employment. Police officers get fired for doing it, Firefighters get fired for doing it. We all know that. Think before you act. Businesses have a vested interest in keeping their name clean. Their need to keep their name clean is greater than your need to pose in pictures in THEIR uniform. If you don't know these things by now, then A) you are very slow and B) it was an expensive lesson.

[albrown]

Then it would only seem fair if..

The fired all the other people from Delta that had posted their pictures on the web.

I can't find any other news where Delta has done that.

There are other blogs and pictures on the web of Delta personel in uniform that are not Delta owned or operated sites.

IMHO, To be a valid policy it has to apply to everyone in the company.

Uniforms

I am shocked to hear you say that people in other professions are fired for using their uniforms other than in the workplace. This may be true in some places, but in most cases folks are encouraged to wear their uniforms as publicity for the company. Granted, if Ellen had torn the blouse and ripped the skirt up the thigh, then there would be a legitimate problem. But, at least in the picture left on her blog page, the company has no gripe.

Clean Uniform, Dirty Policy

There is nothing 'unclean' about such pictures. In the public opinion flight attendants are viewed as attractive anyway, and playing with that image is funny, especially in a private blog. Whoever calls her a **** is probably also peeking up skirts and into blouses when flying, hypocrite. At least this flight attendant is an alive woman of flesh and blood not a snotty ice queen.
Adm they have shot themselves in the foot: Before they decided to fire her, the blog attracted less attention. A simple conversation, urging her to tidy up the blog, would have saved them a lot of trouble.

Well, the US is not the World...

... from Norway, Europe, this case seems completely ridiculous. In most countries in the old world, such a thing would not be in mind of enterprises at all. If they went to extremes like Delta AL here, they would not have a snowballs chance in Hell if taken into court. If the photos were not offensive, used for marketing or for political purposes, of course, but even then you could not fire anybody without warnings and a chance to stop the illegitimate behaviour.

I?m quite used to uniforms. My father is a retired general, my uncle is master of a cruise vessel (at the age of 72!) and I assure you, the never ever have had fantasies about restrictions like those.

That the Soviet union now is history does not mean you have to re-create it over there, folks!

It isn't hard to understand

I checked out her website and it is a pristine example of self promotion. Apparently it started in January of this year and in the few examples I looked at between then and when she was suspended there are numerous complaints against "Anonymous Airlines." While she tried to keep her employer private, as a way to avoid punishment, it wasn't hard to figure out, as Atlanta was constantly mentioned and DA was used on occasion. If she tried to keep it hidden who she was working for then it is obvious that she new what she was saying would lead to punishment, she simply misunderstood that her thinly vieled attempt didn't matter. As for the pictures, they aren't revealing or "innapropriate" in what they show. However, if I ran a company I would probably fire an employee who on company time, in a company vehicle, and in company uniform found time to take suggestive photos and then posted those photos on her online diary, which is more like an online Ellen store. The punishment is stiff, but everyone knows the time in which we live, this "information age" where you need to be careful what you say on the interent. Obviously she is naive and now wants others to foot her bill, she has a donation link on her site. She screwed up and it's a tough lesson, but I wouldn't have handled it any other way if I was Delta. I agree as well that all this legal action is doing is destroying her future employability. I also question her motives for blogging, she said her mother died in Sept. of 2003? This blog started in January of 2004 and I checked the early posts and there's no mention of her mother's death or of there being any reason other than attention and socializing for the start of her blog. She constantly remarks on joining the MHC-Mile High Club-"to many times to count" and of "many stories of wild orgies in foreign countries." She dug her own grave, she was just to dumb to realize it.

Victim or vixen

Use the WWW for personal therapy and claim victimization over the consequences.. what's wrong with that picture? The "Queen" obviously doesn't get it... non causa pro causa? Amazing rationalization.

Delta Managment

Skilled managers talk to people when there is a problem. Weasels act like Delta did in this case. Expect it will cost them.

Good luck to Ellen, bm

You weren't fired for blogging

You were fired for being dumb online and doing so in a company uniform.

Here's a life tip. Make your employer look bad, go find a new job. Not too hard to figure out.

[nitewatch]

You kinda deserved it.

In a way, you kinda deserved it. Sorry. I am a very left-wing, liberal type but if I had a company and my employees were globally offending my operation for the sake of a few laughs and their own inferiority complex I'm afraid they'd be fired. Delta might not be the most employee-centric company around, but the idea of 'team' is tarnished when one uses her clought-lofted uniform to stage complaints and quirrels about her company.

One thought is, if the company is/was so bad why bother working there then or trying to get your job back now? One would wonder if the 'blog' was about the job or about yourself. After all, you do call yourself a 'queen'.

[mrobzo]

Kind of deserved it?

I have no doubt that you are a management puppet. You are not a liberal if you would demean the freedoms guarranteed by the first amendment and that is what it is. The internet is a new frontier where the freedom of speach will be fought and hopefully won. If a company doesn't like the blogs, they can shape up or ignore them and learn freedom tolerance.

You fully deserved this & need to be flogged more!

Those of you who are supporting ellen for "freedom of speech", fired for wrong reasons, then you are kidding yourself. if you were running a company, then you would "sacked" her straight for defaming the company & bringing it to such disrepute. so you want to blame large corporations, so dont jump into this issue. Ellen is more than immature, she is arrogant, evil minded & deliberate in her intent, so she fully deserved what she got & more. Infact delta should have sued her in court for what she did.

[IT makes sense]

What did you expect?

I'm sure Delta could care less about your blogging, if they weren't implicated either by words or pictures. As an employee, you have an implied obligation to represent your employer. The problem began Delta perceived your blogging and/or photos as disparaging their reputation, and they had to draw the line - the same thing that most organizations would do.

What you do on your own time is your business, but when you drag them into it - it becomes their business, and they need to protect it.

Delta Hypocrisy

I am kind of surprised that some people think Ellen ?deserved? to be fired for posting mildly risqué pictures on the internet. I think it reeks of hypocrisy.

1. Did you see those pictures? They are tame. You see more bare flesh on television shows like ?Desperate Housewives? or the ?Bachelor.? Give me a break.

2. Delta, in the past, used to exploit the good looks of their female flight attendants in their advertising campaigns. Does anyone remember the old ?Fly me!? adds? All the airlines did or still do this to some degree. Sex sells. Sorry if it has turned around and bit them on the butt.

3. Delta has no employee policy regarding blogging.

4. Male Delta employees have personal websites and blogs that contain what some would call ?inappropriate material.? Why aren?t they getting fired?

5. Delta is in enough trouble already. They don?t need this kind of distraction. Fire the idiot who fired Ellen. That person has no human resources judgment whatsoever.

6. Good luck Ellen!

if you want it personal keep it personal

All in all she should take it with a grain of salt... but we do live in a cultural infastructure that currantly frowns on employees who cant keep private personal information out of the job...ie-employee silliness. Too bad she had to get fired to realize that. Blowing off steam, I could understand, complaints, I could understand, if taken to the source, but what company likes bad publicity, and even worse, self agrandizement on their dime? Of course there is nothing out here to stop anyone from saying what ever they want to say about anyone else,but as always,you must expect consequences.

work is personal

I work. I am a person. Work is personal

[reustle]

Rule book

After reading the past 30posts, with lots for and a few against her action. I am kinda sickend by thoughs who belive that what she did was wrong and got what was comming to her.

1. If she gave out confidental info, I would agree with her employer. She didn't

2. If she violated a written company rule I would agree with her employer. She indicated there were NO SUCH RULES.

Let me make a subpoint on this there are companies that have written polices that do not allow this activity.

3. If her employer enforced a written policy I would agree with them. From what I can tell shes the only one nailed for it.

What she did perhaps was not the best thing, however there were no rules stopping her eighter before the termination. Unless there was a policy she did nothing wrong.

Its an employers responcablity to make sure thier rules are enforced and to make sure the rules are written down so everyone with in the company can comply. Rather than someone high up who did not like what you did on your own time you get walked out reguardless of the company rule book said or did not say.

Heres my simple example:
If you don't like something someone did on the web or else where, you can't have them arrested without showing they broke an EXISTING LAW.

Ellen best of luck

Watch your back

I don't think this blogger necessarily deserved to get fired, but I do think that assuming that your employer will pay a blind eye to your documenting an inside opinion of their company is naive, to say the least.

When you blog, you tell the world about your own opinion. If the company can find your postings online, there's no reason anyone else can't. And once you've reached this point, what's to stop you slandering their name in black and white.

The bigger issue here occured during the election. Unfortunately blogging opinons became considered as "News" and fact. This is an unfortunate direction for an obvious opinion piece. In the same timeframe, one of the bloggers who ripped on Kerry also happened to be a senior employee of a large midwest bank, and his postings had timestamps during the working day. This causes an issue in a company environment, and I think this will ultimately kill the whole blogging concept.

Remember you're putting your own personal life and information on the net for anyone to read. Most people wouldn't be seen dead divulging such information to a friend. Yet 'bloggers' incorrectly consider the net a neutral medium, and those who risk it, should remember to do so at their own peril.

[basketsbyrett]

I know I should know

What is blog ?

[jerrellt]

What is a blog

It's short for Web Log (or weBLOG)

[David Arbogast]

Employment At Will

Employment at will. Ever heard of the concept? It means that you can quit at any time for any reason. It also means that you can be fired at any time for any reason. This is outlined in the employment contract, and assuming she was hired as an employee at will, she has absolutely zero legal defense unless she can prove that Delta broke the law in firing her. If her actions upset management, they reserve the right to terminate her employment. All this talk about personal rights, freedome of speech, etc. is pointless if she signed an employment contract. Your freedom of speech is NOT a guaranteed freedom. Speech is regulated. Always has been, always will be. This is no crusade for human freedom, this is a person who is bitter about being fired for behaving improperly. Perhaps she will learn her lesson... assuming the clueless quit encouraging her. She only gets press because this story is related to a "blog," which for some reason, people think is some amazing new technology.