E-mail supervision, ethics 4

[infogeslan]

I did post a question like this one several months ago, but I consider this forum is more appropiate than the one I used back then. We have a Lotus Domino 6.0 in our company and the administrator has the power to see, read, log and administrate all e-mails in the company. Is this ethical or legal? By the way, I am the administrator and want to know about your opinions before I do anything.

Thanks a lot.


"Let us be the change we want to see in the world" M.Gandhi

 

[skiflyer]

If you notify your employees upon hiring (or at least upon implementation of the policy) it's completely ethical. The computers/email are the property of the company and not to be used for personal correspondence etc. etc.

-Rob

 

[PCLine]

Which country are you from (for the legal eagles)?

The first thing is you have to have all the appropriate "policies" in place spelling out what people can and can't do. Also, you have to make them aware of the fact that all e-mails can be screened.

You also have to make this is living procedure. That is once everybody is inducted you have to demonstrate on a fairly regular basis that this actually happens. I would suggest an e-mail every once in a while to all users (but I have never seen this done. lol)

You also have to ensure that all "new comers" are inducted in this procedure.

On the legal side, I think the civil liberty groups are fighting it out so the ground isn't completely clear.

But from an ethical point of view ~ as long as you tell people AND keep reminding them (preferably by e-mail because you can get your read receipts etc.) then you have done as much as anyone can expect.

The one point I haven't mentioned is "secure terminals". How you deal with people allowing their machines to be "used without their knowledge" is another matter...

All the best.

 

[lionelhill]

Why is it so very different to an office telephone system, where very often receptionists and maintenance engineers could both (in theory) listen in?

 

[infogeslan]

I live in Spain, and I think yours is a good idea. Actually I am working with the mail procedures, and that's the reason why I'm asking. I have quite clear that we have to tell everybody (by mail) that they can be screened. To be fair, they have to be informed. I don't want to prosecute anybody, but the owner of the company really wants to control this. I try to find the limits, at least the logical limits.

Thanks for your advice

 

[infogeslan]

To Lionelhill. I agree that is a good point. Why is e-mail so different from telephone?

 

[Kjonnnn]

I think you should qualify what you mean.

There are 3 things;

Having the Authority to do so;
Having the Ability to do so;
Actually Actively doing so on regular basis.

Having the power and ability to read emails is different than actively doing it. What do you mean?

I have the ability to sit here and peruse users harddrives... but I don't.

 

[CajunCenturion]

A good reading on the subject may be found at the following link:

http://cobrands.business.findlaw.com/human/nolo/ency/751CFB9F-5A4B-48FB-A85BC08E2D9862E5.html

That being said, it may indeed make a difference on where you are as local laws may be different. The law is evolving to be sure, but as of right now, the law generally cides with the employer.

With respect the ethical aspect, it perfectly reasonable to expect an employer to supervise the employees to insure that the monies invested in the business, the equipment, and certainly the people, are being used wisely and in the best interests of the company. I think it's unreasonable to assume that while at work, you can expect privacy from your employer. After all, you're on the employer's nickle.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[xutopia]

I signed a waiver that says my employer has the right to do so to get the job.

It doesn't matter cause for personal email I just use an SSH connection to my home machine and check my emails there!

Ahhh the power of encryption!!!

Gary

http://www.xutopia.com

Haran
********************************

 

[skiflyer]

But from an ethical point of view ~ as long as you tell people AND keep reminding them (preferably by e-mail because you can get your read receipts etc.) then you have done as much as anyone can expect.


I'd go one step further... have them sign off on it. This isn't the kind of thing where you want to assume someone's read it or hope they have, but rather you want a signature saying they have, and they agree to it. If they refuse, they don't get email. Providing something and then putting a requirement on it is harder.

-Rob

 

[PCLine]

I'd go one step further... have them sign off on it. This isn't the kind of thing where you want to assume someone's read it or hope they have, but rather you want a signature saying they have, and they agree to it. If they refuse, they don't get email. Providing something and then putting a requirement on it is harder.

Getting people to "sign-off" in an induction environment is quite acceptable ~ once is enough. Getting them to sign-off each and every time you want to remind them is going a bit too far IMHO.

All the best.

 

[SemperFiDownUnda]

xutopia has it right. If you want privacy use some other mechanism. I know somepeople that uses PGP to send email from work even for emails like "Can you pick up some milk on the way home?". Fact is the administrators, no mater email system you use, probably have a way to view your email. If you don't want them to read it then you best encrypt it. If they come and ask you what the contents are then you have the choice to show them or suffer what consiquences they impose. The other point is would they? Unless something draws them to look at your email then they probably have better things to do.

 

[infogeslan]

I agree e-mail is a tool, like the telephone is. I consider two things. One is that in the workplace, the tools that one uses must be used for professional matters, but not only. Also, like anyother thing in this world, the use can get into abuse. I am the first who sometimes uses the e-mail for "get the milk before you drive home" issues. The word is "sometimes". It is right of course to use the tools one has in it´s work place to improve one´s life quality. But sometimes the ethics involve our own use or abuse of the e-mail and other recourses for personal matters as workers. There should be a limit, but like all limits, it´s very thin and many times not clear.

I have done many things in our company to educate people in the use of internet technologies. But with some of them it's useless. Don´t know why, a lot of people use the tools only to do what they want, and not what they should. Many times they use it unethicaly. On the other hand I don't want to punish all the "good" users.

On the other extreme I have the presindent of the company, who want´s to control and restric all. I don´t agree with this possition either.

 

[dkediger]

After the initial sign-off, its pretty straightforward to change/add to the logon script/screen a summary of the AUP:

"By logging on to this system, you are accepting the terms of the Acceptable Use Policy of Company X. The complete terms of the policy are available from/at ..."

 

[flapeyre]

I once worked at a very, very large company where every sign on screen had the words:

USE OF THIS SYSTEM IS FOR <company-name> MANAGEMENT-APPROVED PURPOSES ONLY.

In those days (1980's), I didn't have external e-mail; but some manager-types were starting to get it. Security was very tight.

In my current job, I had to sign a waiver acknowledging the e-mail policy. Since I have a persoanl account, I discourage friends and family from e-mailing me trivial stuff at work. The PC group can read everything on the server, so if it's personal, it goes to the home account (note that my e-mail notifications from Tek-Tips go to my personal account, not the work account).


&quot;When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for here you have been, and there you will always long to return.&quot;

--Leonardo da Vinci

 

[greyted]

All,
Having finished reading the newspaper an hour ago and then reading this thread with regard to e-mail usage in the work place, there was an interesting article explaining a new code of practise for British business.

Intrusive monitoring will have to be justified and in almost all cases employees must be told when it is going on. The new 42 page code of practice covers e-mail, voicemail, checking Internet usage and recording with CCTV cameras.

One quote, &quot;Monitoring in the workplace can be intrusive, whether examining e-mails, recording phone calls or installing CCTV cameras . Employees are entitled to expect that their personal lives remain private and they have a degree of privacy in the work environment.&quot;

This new code sets out how employers should comply with the Data Protection Act and encourages respect for Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which creates a right to respect for personal correspondence.
This article states that the Confederation of British Industry are not happy bunnies.
Only in exceptional circumstances will it be appropriate for employers to monitor their employees without their knowledge.

Most interesting I thought.





Ted

A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.
(William James)

 

[SemperFiDownUnda]

I think this is the key
&quot;Only in exceptional circumstances will it be appropriate for employers to monitor their employees without their knowledge.&quot;
If the employeer doesn't inform you of monitoring then I think it is unethical.

Companies need to cover themselves. The easiest thing to do is just have the employees to agree to the monitoring. These days they probably have to announce that they monitor your email just because they have products like MIME Sweeper and others Email Nazi programs that block emails with naughty words. Even though someone isn't looking at the emails there is a program that is monitoring every one and probably quarentining (spelling) emails.

 

[guestgulkan]

What would constitute 'exceptional circumstances&quot; I wonder.

I agree that companies should inform its workers that it is monitoring emails etc.. but I can't see why employees should have any comeback on this.
After all, as an employer, I provide all this equipment to do my business - not for my employees to do their personal/private stuff.
I think employees should do their personal stuff in their own time. Any personal stuff they do using company time/equipment should be 'trivial'/non-controversial - e.g phoning their dentist to make/cancel an appointment.

 

[Rhys666]

Check out the European Charter On Human Rights if Spain is signed up to it, which I believe it is.
I believe, and I may be incorrect, that monitoring of all emails without filtering for 'undesirable' content may well be in Breach of such rights. I'm fairly certain, (though open to correction), that a ruling has been made at some point in the EU that an employee has the right to PRIVATE communication, (excluding illegal topics), whilst at work, by email specifically, and also by any other reasonable means.

Rhys
Thought out... Maybe,
Opinionated... Probably
But it is only an opinion!

 

[SemperFiDownUnda]

How would you know &quot;excluding illegal topics&quot; if they are not intrusive? In our day in age you can not expect a company not actively monitor email with atleast an automated process. From scanning for viruses/worms/etc for the obvious reason, to blocking pictures/multimedia files, to just scanning emails for offensive words. When you get an email from someone in a company that company's is effected by your impression from reading email. To boot there is a duty of care from a company to protect their employees from unwanted harrassment and email can be a delivery method of that harrassment.

My view privacy is an employee's choice in the work place. You want privacy then don't shout out in the middle of the office that you are impotent. I don't see, where if the employer informs the employees that they monitor email, a problem. Where is private email in the work place a basic human right? There are other means to communicate while in the work place.