I need a three paragraph Discussion Response. Respond to my peer response Below. Good Morning, class ...

---

I need a three paragraph Discussion Response. Respond to my peer response Below. Good Morning, classmates and Professor, We've reached Unit 5! The classes seem to be going faster and faster towards our end goal. I wish you all the best in the next class. When looking at whether Carl's termination violated his legal expectation of privacy, several factors must be considered within the context of employment law and privacy rights. Generally, an employee's expectation of privacy regarding their social media activity is not absolute, especially when their posts can potentially impact their employer's reputation or business interests. Unless Carl has an employment contract that states otherwise, he is likely an at-will employee. Under this doctrine, the employee can be terminated at any point, without cause, as long as the reason for termination does not violate the law (American InterContinental University 2025). The key is to balance the employee's right to express personal opinions against the employer's legitimate need to maintain a positive public image and protect its business. In this scenario, while Carl posted on Facebook with privacy settings that limited visibility to his friends, the fact that a coworker saw the post and reported it to management introduces a critical element. The legal expectation of privacy is often determined by whether the employee took reasonable steps to protect their information and whether the employer had a legitimate reason to monitor or access the information. Here, Carl's attempt to limit the audience of his Facebook posts suggests he intended to keep his comments private. However, the ease with which a coworker discovered his post diminishes the strength of this expectation. Courts often consider whether the information was obtained through lawful means, such as a coworker voluntarily sharing the post, versus more intrusive methods like hacking or employer surveillance. Additionally, the content of Carl's post directly violated the restaurant's policy against disparaging customers and negatively representing the restaurant on social media, which further weakens his privacy claim. Ultimately, the restaurant's decision to terminate Carl likely does not violate his legal expectation of privacy. While Carl attempted to limit the visibility of his Facebook post, the fact that it was seen and reported by a coworker, coupled with the post's direct violation of company policies, diminishes his claim to privacy in this context. The restaurant's interest in protecting its reputation and enforcing its policies outweighs Carl's expectation of privacy, especially given the potential damage his post could cause the business. This scenario underscores the importance of employees being mindful of their social media activity and adhering to company policies, even when they believe their posts are private. Reference American InterContinental University (2025). Reasonable Expectations of Privacy. Employee Relationships and Rights Review. https://class.aiu-online.com/_layouts/MUSEViewer/Asset.aspx?MID=30454810&aid=30454823