Borrowing a question from The Globe and Mail:
Should companies have the right to monitor their employees' work e-mail?
« The All About You Test | Main | One Degree of Seperation »
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Absolutely. Why shouldn't the boss, who paid for the computer and phone lines, check what you're sending out under the company's name? It should be disclosed though, so there are no misunderstandings.
Posted by: Paula | July 11, 2006 at 09:20 AM
Well, as much as it irks the bleeding heart liberal in me, I'd have to say yes. They should disclose that fact, though, as I'm sure most do. Or am I being naive?
Posted by: Buzz | July 11, 2006 at 09:32 AM
yes/no.
Posted by: blackbird | July 11, 2006 at 09:52 AM
Absolutely.
Posted by: wordnerd | July 11, 2006 at 10:12 AM
Yes of course. The fact that they can is right in our employee manual.
Posted by: Marie | July 11, 2006 at 10:45 AM
I'm with Buzz.
Posted by: Plain Jane | July 11, 2006 at 10:50 AM
Yes.
Posted by: Goldie | July 11, 2006 at 11:02 AM
YES! And if they don't like it, they don't have to work there.
Posted by: Karnov | July 11, 2006 at 11:08 AM
Yes. Definately. If you want private emails, do it at home.
Posted by: Tara | July 11, 2006 at 12:02 PM
Absolutely. As Paula said, they're paying for the computer & Internet connection, as well as the e-mail server and other "back end" equipment. As long as they disclose it, they absolutely have the right to monitor/log your e-mails, voicemails, Internet usage, etc.
Posted by: Phil | July 11, 2006 at 12:03 PM
They should employ one person to read all the mail, and he/she should be sworn to secrecy, revealing only those emails found to be conspiratorial or including paper-clip-theft related issues. This job would become a sacred position of honor, and the person would have their own office. Their job-title could be something like Grand Poobah of Email. And once a week, they could post an anonymous or amusing quote from "someone's" email... just to keep people on their toes, and remind them, that "Big Poobah is watching."
~S :)
Posted by: Shephard | July 11, 2006 at 12:59 PM
if the account is their work account as in joanblow@penguinpublishers.com then Penguin Publishers may be accountable if some employee seems to be speaking on behalf of the company creating a liability issue with some ill-advised email. The company is clearly within their rights to my mind. Whether they have the manpower to enforce it...?
If the employee is just using the company server as a conduit for a web based account, I don''t see any justification for auditing or intruding on privacy.
Posted by: Pearl | July 11, 2006 at 01:28 PM
I would have to say that anything done on a computer that is not one's own, is open for review by the owner of the computer.
This is the policy we have for our own computers, and I see nothing wrong with other computer owners having this same right.
If you want privacy, do it at home. ("It" being anything you don't want others to see. . . .)
Posted by: Mamacita | July 11, 2006 at 01:35 PM
Of course. If it is done on company computers, and on company time, why not?
Posted by: kenju | July 11, 2006 at 02:34 PM
To elaborate on my "yes", I agree with what Pearl said. Our company seems to agree, too :)
Posted by: Goldie | July 11, 2006 at 02:53 PM
If it's a work email address than yes. If it's a personal one they are accessing from work, then NO. They should, however, inform the said employee that checking personal info is a taboo.
Posted by: pickalish | July 11, 2006 at 04:09 PM
I understand why they think they should but I don't think they should monitor email anymore than they monitor telephone calls or idle gossip in the halls
Posted by: Cyndy | July 11, 2006 at 04:43 PM
yes, if they inform the employee first
Posted by: peri | July 11, 2006 at 06:19 PM
yes...the company "owns" the email. They should have the right to fire over abuse.
Posted by: Deana | July 11, 2006 at 08:30 PM
yes
Posted by: better safe than sorry | July 11, 2006 at 09:52 PM
Should they? Pr'bly not. It'd be a waste of time and resources to "catch" the few folks who are possibly seriously abusing the resource.
Can they? Yes. Which would be why I maintain separate work and personal email accounts.
Posted by: Teej | July 11, 2006 at 10:31 PM
Yes. I think they should. Anytime you are on the clock, you should be held responsible for what you're doing with "their" time.
Posted by: Julie | July 11, 2006 at 10:50 PM
um...yes...and no! yes cause it'd catch employees wasting time and no cause I do it alot!
Posted by: Janet | July 11, 2006 at 11:00 PM
Yep. Buzz (way up at the top of comments) said exactly what I was thinking.
Posted by: DebR | July 11, 2006 at 11:08 PM
Yes. One should consider ANYTHING they do on a company computer or phone to be fair game. That includes accessing outside email accounts, IM'ing, and also Christmas shopping. Employee abuse of company computers is why some are now severely limiting Internet access and banning outside program downloads.
If you're at work, you should be working. At least that's what I think.
Posted by: Peaches | July 11, 2006 at 11:28 PM
I agree, yes they have that right. Just do the personal stuff at home.
Posted by: shpprgrl | July 11, 2006 at 11:53 PM
Absolutly.
Posted by: Keb | July 12, 2006 at 01:43 AM
Yes. But I sure wish they wouldn't.
Posted by: LilRed | July 21, 2006 at 10:33 PM
You're on their computer, and their time, so yep.
Posted by: Margaret | July 29, 2006 at 12:34 AM