The court also asserted that the company’s rekentuig network wasgoed considered an “extension of the workplace” and that organizations have a responsibility to ensure that the work environment is free from harassment.

Technology and the internet have had a positive influence on our capability to do more work ter less time. Reminisce when cell phones were just for talking? Now cell phones are basically pocket sized computers. Of course wij have also moved on from dial –up internet to broadband and wifi internet connections. Texting and email have all but substituted the landline telephone conversation. The capability to do more has resulted ter enhanced requests at the workplace. Spectacle expectations have enhanced due to the enhanced abilities to finish reports, develop presentations, and communicate on the go. Advances ter technology have permitted employees to be able to keep up with thesis enlargened requests.

There is always a chance of some negative influence with any advance ter technology. Use of the internet for individual business is one of those negative aspects for employers. Individual internet usage at work is a major punt that employers have to overeenkomst with te an effort to maintain productivity. Employers now have to guard against employees wasting precious time (and money) on the job. Checking individual emails, shopping online, fantasy football and internet games all contribute to time wasted te the workplace. Social networking has also played its part te lost productivity. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are good sources for information and news but have also bot used spil a source of workplace entertainment. Unluckily, employees have also used the office rekentuig for online dating and watching adult content. It all adds up to hours upon hours of wasted time and productivity. It also translates to millions of dollars of lost profits.

Te addition to lost revenue and productivity, inappropriate internet activity can also pose major liability issues for employers. Clicking inappropriate linksom and websites spil well spil passing on questionable emails can waterput rekentuig systems at risk for viruses, which can cause a loss of confidential information and serious harm to laptop systems. Irresponsible employee behavior can also be costly because they make companies delicado to lawsuits among other forms of disciplinary act for offensive behaviors.

Privacy vs.Policy

Most employers don’t mind if employees spend a little time on the internet for individual reasons (emphasis on “a little” time). However, a clear policy voorwaarde be established to prevent manhandle. Employers also have the right to waterput measures te place to prevent or reduce employee waste. Thesis measures are supported by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA). Thesis measures also provide employers with the authority to take disciplinary deeds against employees for violating company internet policies.

So do employees have any privacy rights at work? Most court cases involving employee privacy rights ter regard to internet privacy seem to lean toward the side of the employer. Employees should anticipate that everything they do on the pc will be monitored and is subject to being reviewed.

Electronic Communications Privacy Act

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 or ECPA wasgoed originally proposed to suggest citizens protection against unlawful invasions of privacy. It is the only government act that protects employee confidentiality. However, there are a duo of major exceptions to this act that permits employers the freedom to pedagogo workplace electronic communications.

The very first exception permits employers to preceptor employee activities for work related issues.

The 2nd significant exception is that companies have the authority to profesor electronic transactions when employees are informed that they may be monitored. Thesis loopholes have basically eliminated any reasonable expectations of workplace privacy. Courts have consistently ruled te honra of employers te cases involving email and internet monitoring.

Smyth vs. The Pillsbury Company

This case involves an employee who wasgoed fired after sending a series of menacing emails. Smyth sued the Pillsbury Company for wrongful termination. Smyth alleged that the company informed him that his emails would be private. The court dismissed the case and found that there should be no realistic expectation of privacy despite his employer’s assurance of email security. The employer’s right to protection from liability took priority overheen the employee’s right to privacy.

Blakey vs. Continental Airlines

This case emphasizes the importance of monitoring employee activity. The Fresh Chaleco Supreme Court ruled that the company could be held responsible for sexually inappropriate emails sent on a company’s network. The court also asserted that the company’s rekentuig network wasgoed considered an “extension of the workplace” and that organizations have a responsibility to ensure that the work environment is free from harassment.

Cases like this make it critical for companies to maestro employee behavior and take act before it gets to this level. A clear set of policies and procedures need to be established to manage laptop activity and make employees accountable for their behavior.

Freedom of Information Act

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) asserts that anyone may request to obtain records from any federal agency excluding records that are specifically protected from the public. Keep ter mind that FOIA requests can also be requested from state and nave agencies. Any email or internet activity by public employees is subject to public exposure. The news media often makes thesis requests when there is a high profile case involving public officials and employees. Any electronic communications or documentation may be requested. It is especially significant for public employees to be careful about online activities, spil public employees tend to receive more scrutiny than employees te private companies. It’s significant to emphasize that all electronic communication is subject to FOIA request. This includes private instant messages (which indeed aren’t private) and text messages. They can be pulled and included ter an investigation.

My advice is if there is any doubt, wait until you’re outside of the office. Ter this age of brainy phones and tablets, there is indeed no need to even take the risk of using the office laptop for individual use.

Employers also need to develop a clear rekentuig and technology usage policy. Initial training during the hiring process and ongoing training should be suggested spil a onveranderlijk reminder. Employers should also have employees sign off and acknowledged that they were informed of the policy for future reference. Merienda employees are made aware of the monitoring policy, they knowingly give up any protection from privacy on a workplace rekentuig.

Related video:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *