Drawing the line between slander, watercooler chat
Drawing the line between gossip, watercooler chat

By Paula Burkes Erickson

Published: June 15, 2007

PSST.

Want to hear a secret? Gossiping at work can lead to job loss. Just ask four now-former employees of Hooksett, N.H., who in mid-April were fired without warning after a closed-door vote of the town council for gossiping about their boss.

According to a lawyer's fact-finding report, the longtime female employees — two department heads and two administrative assistants — lost their jobs because one had referred to the town administrator in derogatory terms and because they discussed a rumor that he was having an affair with a female subordinate.

The council of Hooksett, a quaint town of 11,721 in southern New Hampshire, denied an appeal for reinstatement by the administrative assistants and June 7 released legal opinions explaining why. "... these employees do not represent the best interests of the town of Hooksett and the false rumors, gossip and derogatory statements have contributed to a negative working environment and malcontent among their fellow employees,” the decision said in part.

The council said the women, who've come to be known as the "Hooksett Four,” knowingly spread a false rumor. One councilor called the talk "malicious slander,” saying the administrator was afraid to meet one-on-one with female employees for fear of being a victim of a malicious sexual harassment suit.

But B.J. Branch, an attorney representing the women, told The Oklahoman his clients never said anything about an affair or spread a rumor. It was a town resident, he said, who initially questioned the late hours shared by the administrator and female subordinate.

His clients, were "legitimately questioning the conduct of their supervisor, and whether the female subordinate was getting preferential treatment,” said Branch, who plans to sue for damages. "It almost cheapens it to call it gossip,” he said. "It might have been idle, not particularly thoughtful, talk. But there was no harm intended.”

Informal discussions at the water cooler or in the lunchroom can be productive, studies show. Recent surveys conducted by an independent research firm for Office Team show 40 percent of workers and 21 percent of executives say such chatter provides opportunities for employee bonding. Thirty-four percent of executives and 26 percent of workers say it wastes time.

But when does watercooler chat become grounds for termination? Legal experts agree it's when talk negatively affects people in protected age, gender, race or religion classifications. One local employer believes it's when an employee intentionally hurts another. He's addressed malicious gossip in the company handbook.

In the case of the "Hooksett Four,” the woman whose relationship with the boss was questioned could file a harassment claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said Gayle Barrett, general counsel for the Oklahoma State Human Resources Council. With insinuations she was sleeping her way to the top, she could claim she felt harassed because of her gender, she said.

Or any employee who had filed a claim with the EEOC, about which co-workers were gossiping, could claim, in an ensuing hostile work environment, they were suffering retaliation for filing the claim, Barrett said.

Gossiping potentially develops before or after every harassment lawsuit, Barrett said. As much as workers are told to keep investigations confidential, word can leak out.

Public employees have free speech protection.

"Gossip could be a matter of public concern which must be balanced against the employer's interest,” Barrett said.

Barrett advises employers to note gossip, investigate rumors and address, individually or in a group meeting, the need for refrain.

She once had difficulty defending a company president charged with sexual harassment because the company hadn't addressed rumors of his womanizing which were well-believed.

Bob Benham, owner of Balliet's, recently added a malicious gossip paragraph to the store's personnel policies and procedures manual.

It reads: "Malicious gossip by employees about other employees or customers is strictly forbidden, as is researching personal information about employees or customers on the Internet or other records. Violation of this policy may result in immediate termination of employment.”

The verbiage grew out of two incidents about a year ago — one where after-hour socializing led to things being said about people at work, and the other where three employees went online to check out a situation about a co-worker.

"Both created enormous tension in the store,” Benham said. "Someone wouldn't talk to someone else, creating a mood customers could feel.”

After he addressed the first incident in a storewide meeting, the gossip and tension stopped.

In the second, Benham met individually with the three employees. Two workers came clean and hadn't realized the impact of their actions, Benham said. The third denied involvement, was put on warning, lost an opportunity for promotion and left about a year later.

Natalie Ramsey, an employment attorney with McAfee and Taft, hesitates to say all watercooler chatter is gossip.

"Employees have the right to talk among themselves, even complain about things like inappropriate language in the workplace,” she said. "But things can morph into something they shouldn't be talking about.”

Oklahoma has at-will employment, she said.

That means an employee may quit his job whenever and for whatever reason he wants, usually without consequence. In turn, at-will employers may terminate workers whenever and for whatever reason they want, usually without consequence.

Contributing: The New Hampshire Union Leader