Those companies are bad. There’s ways to train users and secure material on slack. Picking bad tools and firing users for trying to work around IT rules punishes innovation and results in worse employees.
If they just capriciously fire someone for deciding to use Slack in their functional team away from everyone else, sure.
But if one's org has a security mandated policy to use specific communication programs and services that one presumably agrees to and signs a document asserting their compliance to as a contingency of continued employment, and that person violates it anyway...I'm hard pressed to call the company "bad" when they take disciplinary or corrective action against that individual.
Such cavalierness (generally speaking) is how you get ants..I mean data breaches et al.
Slack isn’t some random company, they have enterprise practices and there are third party companies that do data management on slack.
An enterprise can adapt to use tools and apply security to the tools used and needed.
Also there is really basic “don’t post sensitive data to the wrong places” training. I think there’s a difference between banning posting sensitive data and stopping teams from planning a meeting agenda.
A company that can’t stop an enployee posting sensitive data to Slack also won’t be able to stop them posting it all sorts of bad places.
I expect that sensitive data is protected in an org. With something more effective than firing people from posting it to Slack.
If they just capriciously fire someone for deciding to use Slack in their functional team away from everyone else, sure.
But if one's org has a security mandated policy to use specific communication programs and services that one presumably agrees to and signs a document asserting their compliance to as a contingency of continued employment, and that person violates it anyway...I'm hard pressed to call the company "bad" when they take disciplinary or corrective action against that individual.
Such cavalierness (generally speaking) is how you get ants..I mean data breaches et al.