Supreme Court: Search of work-issued pager acceptable

In a mid-December 2009 blog post, I talked about a case involving an employee in an Ontario, CA, police department who sent sexually explicit text messages on a work pager. After first warning the employee about the number of texts being sent each month, the employer dug a little deeper and reviewed the actual content of the texts. This set off a heated privacy debate that elevated to the Supreme Court.

Our nation’s highest court recently heard arguments and delivered a unanimous ruling: The police department did not violate the constitutional privacy rights of the employee when it audited his text messages on a city-issued pager.

While Justice Anthony M. Kennedy shared that the court was uneasy fashioning comprehensive legal rules, based on the pace of technological and cultural change, he offered practical insight:

“Cellphone and text message communications are so pervasive that some persons may consider them to be essential means or necessary instruments for self-expression, even self-identification. On the other hand, the ubiquity of those devices has made them generally affordable, so one could counter that employees who need cellphones or similar devices for personal matters can purchase and pay for their own.” New York Times

Although the Supreme Court’s decision did not address the privacy rights of people employed by private companies, I think it’s safe to say employers have firm legal footing for issuing a policy prohibiting personal use of company equipment – and for prying if they have a legitimate, work-related purpose for doing so.

Supreme Court: Search of work-issued pager acceptable

Inappropriate texting on company equipment a privacy issue - or a policy issue?

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in a case involving sexually explicit text messages sent by an employee using employer-provided equipment. After an employee of the Ontario, CA, SWAT unit was warned repeatedly for exceeding the number of texts sent per month, his employers reviewed the content of the texts, setting off a whole privacy debate. The court is to determine whether the employer violated privacy rights by reviewing the messages.

My knee-jerk reaction? Privacy shmivacy. When it comes to privacy vs. policy issues where employees don’t follow the rules, it’s hard to comprehend a reasonable defense.

“But judge, I didn’t understand the privacy policy.”

That’s the only possible explanation, in my opinion. As dim-witted as that may sound, it puts the onus completely on the corporation to defend itself. As HR specialists, it becomes your burden to first, create a comprehensive electronic usage policy that covers all the “what ifs” and then, to ensure every employee has reviewed and understood the policy. It only takes a few employees saying the rules and regulations were never explained to them, or that they didn’t understand what was explained, to create a leak in your airtight policy.

As unbelievable as this kind of court case may sound (the employee blatantly used a company phone to send racy messages!), it further demonstrates the importance of creating a thorough privacy policy review process that engages every employee. In the case of the Ontario SWAT unit, their policy allowed for a certain number of texts per month per employee. If employees exceeded the limit, it was their responsibility to pay for the overage amount. That’s a good policy and one that every officer understood. The issue arose when one officer repeatedly violated the limit policy, prompting his manager to audit the messages for personal use.

What was the purpose of the excessive texts and were they a detriment to the officer’s productivity on company time? Which begs another question: How detailed should your privacy policies be? Enough to cover all the bases. The Ontario SWAT unit was very detailed in their policy in some areas, but lacking in others. If the policy had clearly stated that excessive abuse of the monthly limits would lead to a review of the message content, employees would have been aware that their activities could lead to further scrutiny.

While this case seems cut and dried, it isn’t because it forces HR managers from coast to coast to review, revise and reinforce their privacy policy standards. At the very least, you may want to look at your privacy policies when it comes to corporate-supplied equipment to ensure you have an iron-clad and understandable position.

Inappropriate texting on company equipment a privacy issue - or a policy issue?

Are you living a life of "weisure"?

A life of "weisure"? What in the world is "weisure"?

"Weisure time" is a term coined by sociologist Dalton Conley of New York University, to explain the increasingly blurred line between work and leisure for Americans.

From the CNN article:

Many who haven't already abandoned the 9-to-5 workday for the 24-7 life of weisure probably will do so soon, according to New York University sociologist Dalton Conley, who coined the word. It's the next step in the evolving work-life culture.

"Increasingly, it's not clear what constitutes work and what constitutes fun," be it "in an office or at home or out in the street," Conley said. Activities and social spaces are becoming work-play ambiguous, he says, as "all of these worlds that were once very distinct are now blurring together."

Smartphones, like the Blackberry and iPhone, have made mixing work and play easier than ever before. Such technology has made it almost commonplace for Americans to be connected with the office while spending time with their families.

But when leisure invovles work, is it truly leisure time? Aren't we all supposed to be working toward a healthy work/life balance?

Do you feel like you're living a life of "weisure"? Post a comment and tell us about it.

Are you living a life of "weisure"?

Office etiquette: Tips for “smart” phone use

Business etiquette tells us that answering a cell phone call during a meeting is something highly frowned upon. But what does business etiquette have to say about emails, texts and tweets?

Unfortunately, many people don’t realize that answering an email on your Blackberry or iPhone during a meeting can be just as rude as answering a call.

The chances that you’ll find someone in your office with a cell phone that is simply a phone have become quite slim these days. Along with calling, most of the cell phones on the market also have ability to text, email, tweet and instant message.

Because of the wide-range of tools these smartphones provide, it can be hard for some people to ever take them out of their pocket. For many of the mobile addicts out there, a review of some general business etiquette tips are in order. 

The following tips can help any business-etiquette offender learn how to be more well-mannered:

• Ask yourself: Is it really urgent? Most of the time, a call or email can wait until you’re out of a meeting or finished with an important task. If it isn’t urgent, let it go and check it later. If it is urgent, politely excuse yourself from the room and handle it quickly.


• Don’t touch it. Even if you’re using the phone to take notes during the meeting, your colleagues may assume that you’re texting a friend or playing a game. Simply looking at your phone during a meeting causes people to wonder what you’re up to and diverts their attention away from the presenter.


• Keep it off the table. Whether you’re in a conference room or a restaurant, it’s best to keep your phone off of the table. Keeping it in plain view shows to the people around you that they’re less important than what’s on your phone.


• Lose it. If you find that you can’t get through a meeting or meal without constantly checking for a new message, lose it. Leave your phone at your desk and eliminate the temptation.


• Post a sign. Some people need a clear sign that using their cell phone in certain areas of the office is not allowed. Post a “No Cell Phone Sign” to encourage people to silence or turn off their cell phones.

Office etiquette: Tips for “smart” phone use

Digital dilemma: Paying employees to check BlackBerrys?

Should employees receive overtime compensation for checking company email, checking messages or posting a work-related blog from home?

The question recently became a hot topic at ABC, over whether the company should pay writers to check their BlackBerry outside of work.

The writers’ union challenged a longstanding contract waiver stating that writers who occasionally checked their BlackBerry after hours did not receive time-and-a-half overtime pay.

ABC argued that paying employees time-and-a-half overtime for using their BlackBerry for minutes at a time would turn into a nightmare of a paperwork and payroll issue.

The Writers’ Guild’s wanted to make a point that while technology makes it easy to work from anywhere, but we must avoid creating a 24/7 workplace.

In the end, ABC still will not pay overtime for employees who check email away from the office, holding true to their practices before the argument started.

As technology makes it easier to work from home, blurring the lines between work and play, issues like this will only continue to crop up.

Do you think this is a workplace issue we should be worried about? What’s the right thing to do?

Digital dilemma: Paying employees to check BlackBerrys?