The court found the emails were not protected by either a right of privacy or the attorney client privilege. Petrovich Development Company LLC (California 2011) an employee contacted her attorney on a company computer with a company email account. The court held the emails were protected by the attorney client privilege, but did not really address the privacy issue. (New Jersey 2010) an employee emailed her lawyer on a company laptop, but through her personal password protected Yahoo account. Several cases involving private emails on employer time and equipment have gone against the employee and determined that the employer’s interception or use of an employee’s personal emails was permitted because of policies that allowed it and implied consent and because the employee was using employer owned computers or sending the emails from work.Įven cases of employees contacting their attorney have gone both ways. However, employees should be careful about using those accounts and passwords on employer owned equipment, because that information can be stored in backups, is visible to monitoring software and may not really be private at all.
The employer should not look at private emails on a private email account that is password protected by the employee because the employee has a reasonable expectation of privacy, the account is the employee’s, and computer hacking laws provide protection against viewing personal emails without consent. Personal Accounts: It depends on the circumstances-whether the use is at work and on employer equipment. But if you’re spending a lot of time at work loudly talking about your weekend plans, there is a good argument that it wasn’t private and you can be disciplined for not working.Įmployer Computers- Again, if the employer owns the computers and runs the network, the employer is generally entitled to look at whatever it wants on the system, including emails. Personal Phones: Employers generally cannot monitor or obtain texts and voicemails on an employee’s personal cell phone.
Quon (2010), the US Supreme Court found that a police officer’s personal text messages on a government owned pager were not private and the employer/police department had the right to view the messages-even though public employees (unlike private employees) have 4 th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure since their employer is the government. This includes cell phones, voice mail and text messages provided to employees.įor example, in City of Ontario v. Can you spy on your employees? Is it spying if they consent? Does an employer have to give notice before monitoring employee phone and computer use? Well, it depends on who owns the accounts and equipment and what the employer’s policies are.Įmployer Phones: Employers generally can monitor, listen in and record employee phone calls on employer owned phones and phone systems.
0 kommentar(er)
