Gunpowder Chronicle posted on July 28, 2007 8:05 AM | Rating:
| Views: 253
The city of Salisbury has allegedly decided to ban a certain website from their computers, and that website has responded by a) providing a proxy site as a way around the restrictions, and b) questioning the legality of such a move. I thought I would share my insight as a member of the information technology community for nearly 15 years now. I should say, that as the Solution Architect for my employer, I am part of the process of establishing such policies and advising the company leadership on what they can, and cannot do. I am not a lawyer, and I do not play one on TV. So if you are an employer confronting such issues, I suggest that you contact your counsel for a definitive list of what you can and cannot do.
In terms of information technology-- computers, phones, cellphones, pdas, internet connectivity, phone connectivity, etc. -- the rules of usage and what an employer can and cannot restrict are identical to any other company-owned property. All of these items, when provided by the employer, are considered the property of the employer. As such, the employer can place any restrictions upon their use they choose. They can do this through a written policy, or by using other technology to ensure compliance.
It is not uncommon for employers to take a number of measures. For example, at my company, we archive every incoming and outgoing mail. Periodically, at the request of one of the partners, I will provide these emails for their review based on a number of keyword searches. Occasionally I will be asked to monitor (in live fashion) all incoming and outgoing email. We regularly will log all traffic on our firewalls. And company management has been known to inspect company computers on occasion. Our usage policies are rather open -- we don't block certain sites, although we do ask employees not to use their company internet connections for watching streaming video or listening to streaming audio.
I also want to mention than if an employee tries to circumvent those policies, they can be charged -- in many jurisdictions -- with theft.
That's right-- theft. I am, of course, talking about criminal charges. But the employer can impose a number of sanctions up to an including criminal charges. Why? Because an employer's right to control their property is generally considered absolute. That is why employers, for example, can ban employees from smoking anywhere on the property. Or how employers can ban employees from keeping firearms in their vehicles on company property (or in company-provided parking facilities). Employee rights in many cases are trumped by employer property rights, and that should be understood clearly by any employee.
It should also be noted that in Maryland, we are an at-will employment state. That means that the employer can dismiss an employee at any time at will, without cause. This is one of the sanctions every employee should keep in mind.
In my opinion, ultimately the issue about how employees use company equipment and company-provided services comes down to hiring quality employees. If an employer finds that they need to expend great resources on monitoring their employees' activities, they may want to consider what this does to their overall bottom line. It might even be time to change employees. If you can't trust your employees to use good judgement in terms of using company equipment, how can you trust them in carrying out more mission-critical responsibilities?
And if you are an employee, the safest bet is to treat your employer's time, money, and equipment as if it were your own.