Business Law Is Monitoring of Employee Emails

Business Law

Is monitoring of employee emails and internet use a violation of a person's constitutional right to privacy? This issue is explored in detail in a journal article by Mcevoy entitled "E-Mail and internet monitoring and the workplace: Do employees have a right to privacy?"

In this journal article Mcevoy (2002) discusses the constitutional right of privacy in the workplace, specifically focusing on privacy issues related to employee e-mail and internet monitoring on the job. Her standpoint is that employees should not expect a right to privacy in the workplace with respect to private email communications and internet usage. Her stance is backed by cases brought against employers by employees. More times than not, the employer wins thus is granted the continuing right to monitor employee use of company equipment.

More and more technology has enabled employers to monitor workplace activities, particularly activities employee's engage in while on the web or while using company computers. According to Mcevoy's article a 2000 survey conducted by the American Management Association showed that at minimum 66% of businesses in 1999 were using some form of worker surveillance to monitor employee's activities. That percentage rises to 74% if you include the number of employees monitoring internet use at work (Mcevoy, 2002). As technology allows more surveillance ability, it is only likely that employers will continue to invade an employee's privacy if an employee chooses to use business equipment to conduct personal business.

Is the constitutional right to privacy honored when it comes to workplace email? According to Mcevoy, most employees better think twice before sending private messaged at work using company email. Messages sent on most employers' equipment can legally be monitored. Many employers are purchasing e-mail security systems to monitor employees messaging while at work (Mcevoy, 2002). A study conducted by the American Civil Liberties Union estimated that more than 20 million workers in 2000 had their email communication monitored (Mcevoy, 2002).

Companies justify their monitoring activities using the law, claiming that they have the right to "bar personal use of office computers" for private e-mails and maintaining that they have the right to fire employees for conduct that they deem inappropriate, which might include sending personal email messages (Mcevoy, 2002). Most employees who have thus far brought privacy claims against their employers have lost (Mcevoy, 2002).

The law enables employers to monitor employees for the most part as long as they inform employees that the equipment is to be used for business purposes and may be monitored. There are in fact many states that have passed laws that require employers to inform employees if they are conducting electric monitoring in the workplace, including revelation of the "nature and scope of the methods of surveillance the employer might use to conduct electronic monitoring" (Mcevoy, 2002). It is important to note however that even if the employer does not notify the employee of their intent to survey employee's use of company equipment, there is no guarantee at this time that the employee should expect privacy with respect to email communications and internet use.

Employee privacy is still largely an uncharted issue, and employees should be "wary of using e-mail or the Internet in the workplace" (Mcevoy, 2002).

When it comes to constitutional rights of privacy, the most protected rights according to Mcevoy are the employees' own person and bodily fluids, "as well as the employees' personal belongings" such as their car or purse (Mcevoy, 2002). Not many protections however are "afforded employees for items provided for them by their employer for company use, and very little protection is afforded to employer provided items that employees may share with other employees including their office, files and email" (Mcevoy, 2002).

At this time employers do have a leg to stand on. There is a reasonable expectation that when an employer hires an employee to do a certain job, they do it and avoid using corporate hardware or software for personal use. Mcevoy points out that when the constitutional rights to privacy were first drafted, computers and other means of communication had not yet been invented. This may change in the future however, as more and more employees complain that their constitutional right to privacy is being violated by worker surveillance.