While working toward an education degree, a college student began working as a student teacher in a local high school. From the beginning, there were problems with her behavior toward students.

The teacher she was assisting repeatedly told her to adopt a more “down to business” approach and be less familiar with the class.

The last straw came when the student teacher invited the class to communicate with her via Myspace — even though the school had told her it was inappropriate to do so.

Breaking that policy was bad enough, but what was contained inside her Myspace profile was even worse. There was a picture of her in a pirate hat and a plastic cup, featuring the caption “drunken pirate.” She also posted a note discussing a conflict with the class’s teacher, referring to herself as the “official teacher.”

Once parents learned about the profile, they complained. The high school and university removed the woman from the student teaching program. She sued, claiming the college (a public university) violated her right to free speech.

But her case was tossed. Why? The court ruled the student had no right to speech that damaged her employer’s reputation.

Cite: Snyder v. Millersville University

A former employee writes a message online bashing the company and accusing management of condoning illegal behavior — do you have any right to protect the company’s reputation? Probably not, according to this recent court case:

The owner of a company operating several restaurant franchises in New Jersey was profiled in a local newspaper. The article was posted on the paper’s Web site.

In response to an interview question, the owner said that he treats employees “with dignity and respect.” That statement was met with some disagreement from a former employee’s father.

He was representing his daughter in a court case alleging sexual harassment by the managers at the restaurant where she worked. He left a comment under the article discussing the pending case and accusing the owner of condoning sexual harassment.

The comment also said that “the man and his rhetoric are repugnant and fly in the face of facts,” and speculated that any women currently working for the company were being harassed as well.

The company sued the commenter for defamation. Was it successful?

No, the judge threw out the case. According to a previous New Jersey Supreme Court ruling, statements of opinion are immune from defamation claims. The portions of the comment attacking the owner were merely an expression of the commenter’s opinions.

Also, the statements about the pending lawsuit were not defamatory because they were truthful and a “matter of public interest.”

Protect your reputation

The lesson for companies: Once something negative appears online, it’s tough — if not impossible — to make it go away. In this day and age, any disgruntled employee, former employee or customer can do a fair amount of damage with a few keystrokes and a click of the mouse.

The best solution, of course, is to never give anyone a reason to complain — but anyone in HR knows that’s impossible. Here are some more realistic ways to prevent serious damage:

• Work to maintain a positive Web presence (for example, by having employees contribute to blogs and discussion forums).
• Encourage managers to listen to complaints and seek out constructive criticism. Often, employees seek alternate ways to complain because they feel they have no other place to go.
• Write computer policies that prohibit employees from writing derogatory comments about the company and its employees.
• Consider having some or all employees sign confidentiality agreements that ban defamation, or include non-defamation provisions in separation agreements.

The latest example: Domino’s Pizza.

Two employees in a Conover, N.C., store raised a stink recently after they recorded themselves doing disgusting things to food before it was delivered, and then put the video on YouTube.

The recording quickly racked up more than a million hits. The employees were fired, and police charged them with delivering prohibited foods. The employees later claimed it was all a prank and the food hadn’t been given to customers.

But even if the tampered food wasn’t actually given to customers, Domino’s is working hard to keep its public image from being damaged any further.

The company posted a video of its own, apologizing for the incident and discussing the steps it’s taking to keep something similar from happening (for example, re-examining hiring practices).

Oh, and possibly the worst part of the whole situation: The employees weren’t kids. They were 31 and 32 years old.