Comments on: Court Rules Against Work E-mail Snooping

E-mails, Text Messages Are Private When A Third Party Owns The Data, Says Court

[ddkem]

I totally disagree with the ruling. If an employer is providing the computer, pager, cellphone or whatever device, they should have 100% authority to know how it''s being used! This ruling will only allow slackers to slack even more and sue if they feel like their slacking was violated :-)

[sblake63]

Lmao at some of you LOW INCOME people. But why does anybody need a ancient wire tied LAN connected PC anymore especially at work? Anyway, would you transmit personal business over it? Anybody ever hear of a web enabled smart phone? Lmao it has a full function browser, email, messengers. And best of all most of them cost 500 bucks or less - dirt cheap. These things have so many features you barely need a desk top any more!

Please don''t tell me some of you still use ancient clam shell cell phones with no data service plans? if so Lmfao at you - YOU SHOULD BE FIRED for accessing the web or personal email using THE COMPANIES internet access! In this day and age of portable devices that have full internet capabilities, you have NO EXCUSE!

[deacon20081]

I believe in giving employees time during breaks and lunch periods to use the WEB to check their personal email accounts and so forth. E-mail accounts for the business are for Business Use Only, and personal accounts such as yahoo etc are not my concern.
As the administrator I never have to snoop on anyone, I trust the personell to do their jobs and come to me with problems or questions. Acting like Big Brother only makes your personell concious of the fact that they are suspect. The ruling is a good ruling.

[haoli25]

I really never minded sharing the ''replica watch'' and ''free money fairy'' e-mails with my employer.

[Latrocinor]

About time working people won. Why all these post bashing libs?, preserving our right to privacy is very fundamental and conservative.

Posted by dinkydog1
.. .. ..

Typically right wingers own or try to own other people. They get upset about "All men are created equal"

[andor3]

"I should be able to look at anything I want that is done with ny assets."

Not if you make those assets avaialble to me as an employee for use. If I am your employee and you monitor my communications, there will be serious consequences for you and your company. It will be worse for you if it is not disclosed clearly or discriminates in any way. Executives know this now, talk to a corporate attorney.

[andor3]

it is a good ruling, but just common sense that an employer does not have the right to spy on its employees or monitor their communications, or actually do anything other than see if the work they are doing is satisfactory.

Good employers realize this and it is not an issue. In fact, employers can be liable for damages if they are shown to filter email based on keywords, for example.

It comes down to common sense--people need to have communication with families and friends outside of work and no employer has a right to restrict that. Even arrested suspects cannot be held without a phone call.

[drivelphobe]

Anyone who uses the employer''s equipment, phones or computers, to engage in communications of a personal matter, should be terminated. There is no valid reason, other than an extreme emergency, to have such communications while being paid on company time.

The employer should have every right to listen in on phone calls or have access to emails and text messages to verify their nature if made on company time or equipment.

It is absurd to claim "the people won" in this case. The employers will arrange their systems now to make it legal to verify that the "people", lazy, cheating employees, can be monitored and terminated for being involved in private communications without permission.

If you are an employee and want to make a personal communication, do it on break, on your own equipment or with permission of your employer. Otherwise you are stealing and should suffer the consequences.

Just do the work you are hired to do and quit whining. Many employees are looking for handouts, easy work and less hours, of course with higher pay. They are truly a motley bunch in general and need to be supervised like little children.

It is not fair to the high quality employees to tolerate the abuses of the entitlement grabbers and cheaters.

[dinkydog1]

About time working people won. Why all these post bashing libs?, preserving our right to privacy is very fundamental and conservative.

[aldon61]

Great ruling! Big Brother is already in our lives to much as it is!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by MCVet at 03:25 PM : Jun 19, 2008
+

McVet, you and I normally agree on issues but this time I''m going to need some convincing. An employer grants an email account for an employee to conduct company business. The employer, in my opinion has a right to monitor the content of the messages that are being sent on their behalf. If the messages are of a personal nature, that is NOT company business, but the employer still has a right to review the content because the messages are supposed to be company business. Help me out here, make me understand your slant on this. By the way, did the flooding come very close to you? My home state almost floated away.

[aldon61]

Companies don''''t need a reason to fire people -- it''''s called "employment at will".


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Xyno at 03:38 PM : Jun 19, 2008

This is the post I responded to, the individual states may have no right to work laws.

[aldon61]

texanforlogic 2:21---LOL You''''ve got it backwards bud--you and yours are the ones who spew hate on this board--not my side---I just give back what I get!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by blondbiotch at 02:26 PM : Jun 19, 2008
Depends on your state bubba.

[lorinkundert]

Companies don''''t need a reason to fire people -- it''''s called "employment at will".

Only if the termination does not violate any State or Federal labor or discrimination law, all it takes is an employee to demand that the employer state the reason why the termination did not violate any law, once a reason is given it is no longer at-will.

[xyno-2009]

OK we just threaten to fire the worker if we cant read them. Case close libs. Hahahahahaha

Posted by faith_in_w at 03:29 PM : Jun 19, 2008

---------------

Companies don''t need a reason to fire people -- it''s called "employment at will".

[Latrocinor]

Great ruling! Big Brother is already in our lives to much as it is!!

Posted by MCVet
.. .. ..

Well put. Big Brother needs to get lost.

[faith_in_w]

OK we just threaten to fire the worker if we cant read them. Case close libs. Hahahahahaha

[carjenbe]

Ah, the 9th court of appeals, liberal Americana at its finest. I think they all married each other recently.

[mcvet]

Great ruling! Big Brother is already in our lives to much as it is!!