Compliance Policies and Email

email_icon

You should take a look at your computer use and email policies to see how they address three recent cases involving email in the workplace.

The first case involves unauthorized acces: (Van Alstyne v. Electronic Scriptorium, Inc.).  The president of the company had broken into an employee’s personal AOL email account. The employee had occasionally used that email account for business communications. To top off the bad behavior, the president of the company had propositioned the employee before firing her and then accessing that email account.

In the second case (Stengart v. Loving Care [.pdf]), Ms. Stengart resigned from Loving Care and sued the company. Before leaving she e-mailed her lawyer through her personal web-based account from her company-issued computer using the company’s internet access. Loving Care recovered temporary files stored on that computer which contained copies of Stengart’s attorney-client communications. Stengart discovered that Loving Care’s lawyers planned to use her e-mail in the litigation. She asked the trial court to decide whether the e-mail, sent during work hours on a company computer, was protected by the attorney-client privilege. The court held that it was not.

In the third case (Noonan v. Staples), Staples fired sales director Alan S. Noonan  for padding his expense report. Executive Vice President Jay Baitler sent an e-mail to approximately 1,500 employees explaining the reason for the firing. The e-mail contained no untruths, but Mr. Noonan sued for defamation anyhow. Unfortunately for Staples, truth is not a defense in Massachusetts if the challenged statement was communicated with actual malice.

Lessons? What should you have in your company’s computer policy?

First, tell employees that they should not use personal e-mail accounts for purposes of conducting company business.

Second, the company should have a policy that any message sent from a company computer is subject to disclosure and the employees should not have an expectation of privacy.

Third, employees should not access another employee’s files or email accounts, whether they are the company’s or personal.

Fourth, employees should not use email or company computers to send malicious messages.

Finally, make sure you can prove that each employee knows these rules.

See:

Conducting Investigations of Wrongful Workplace Conduct

ginsburg_roy

Roy A. Ginsburg, of Dorsey & Whitney LLP and the blog Quirky Employment Questions, penned an article in the May/June 2008 edition of Business Law Today: Conducting Investigations of Wrongful Workplace Conduct.

The first issue he tackles is whether employees are obligated to participate in a company investigation. He says the answer is yes.

That leads to the next question of whether you can fire the employee who refuses to participate. He says the answer is also yes.

Of course it is best to have a policy that clearly states that employees are are expected to participate in a company investigation and that refusing to participate is grounds for dismissal. (Check your policies.) Of course you do not need to jump directly to dismissal. You can suspend them, demote them or take other action. Again, it is best to have this in the policy.

Ginsburg ends the article with 10 general guidelines  for the investigative process:

  1. Define clearly the investigator’s role.
  2. Retain the right investigator.
  3. Act promptly.
  4. Conduct a thorough investigation.
  5. Do not promise complete confidentiality.
  6. Be nimble.
  7. Get help when needed.
  8. Respond proportionally.
  9. Respond consistently.
  10. Communicate the outcome when possible.

Yes, I realize this article is little old, but one of my reading stacks collapsed and this issue sprung to the top. I took it as a sign that I should read it.