|
|
|
I Spy
Companies seek new ways to cope with employee abuses of online privileges - without turning into Big Brother
|
Business New Haven
9/4/2000
By: Susan E. Cornell
|
The Internet and e-mail: Both have become productive, powerful and arguably indispensable communications tools for businesses of nearly every genus. Most employers long ago concluded that the gains in efficiency brought about by their existence make e-mail and the Internet necessities for employees at all levels.
But, both can become grave liabilities as well as these technological advances are frequently used improperly. Productivity gains can easily be
offset by productivity losses when employees use the Internet and e-mail systems for personal uses - and misuses.
One downside of providing e-mail is that employees may place their businesses in jeopardy by violation of trade secrets, infringement of copyrights and commitment of the company to contracts. Further, company e-mail systems have been used to harass co-workers and defame other businesses.
Providing Internet access, too, poses serious risks: employees may engage in online gaming and stock trading, bidding in auctions, entering contests and countless other activities on company time. Some of these pastimes are addictive or at least habit-forming. All personal use of business computers, of course, decreases productivity.
Employees who don't suspect that their employer may be watching his/her uses of these computer activities ought to think again. The annual American Management Association (AMA) questionnaire results on workplace monitoring and testing reveal that the number of employers involved in surveillance is increasing dramatically: Nearly three-quarters of major U.S. businesses review online activities and communications. This statistic has doubled since the survey was conducted three years ago.
The study shows that more than half (54.1 percent) of firms surveyed monitor Internet connections, while 38.1 percent review e-mail messages.
According to the AMA, the primary reasons for recording and reviewing employee communications are twofold:
- Legal liability: Businesses are interested in monitoring e-mail and Internet usage, as employees can make allegations of hostile work environments if exposed to offensive material.
- Productivity measures: Firms are concerned with the expenditures of both assets and time on activities that are not business-related.
Surveillance is not always a clear-cut inherent right granted to employers, however. There is the issue of privacy intrusion.
Most courts have held that the employer is the property owner of e-mail, since the employer maintains the e-mail system. Thus an employee's e-mail may be accessed for justifiable business purposes. But the question persists: What is considered “acceptable” monitoring?
There are a number of different steps employer can take to reduce the personal use of e-mail and the Internet. Taking a proactive role is not difficult and can help both you and your employees. The two primary questions to answer are:
- Does a clear policy exist? Does your firm have a well thought-through and consistent policy - in writing? This document should clearly communicate use restrictions. An attorney may provide assistance in formulating the policy.
- Are technical solutions in place? Consider technical solutions such as, in the case of Internet usage, blocking connections to inappropriate sites (29 percent of respondent businesses to the AMA study utilize blocking).
A technical solution to potential e-mail abuse can be to program software automatically to add individual signature lines to all outgoing e-mail. Signature lines help in two ways:
1. Accountability - Knowing that e-mail bears an individual's own name, she or he is likely to think more cautiously about the repercussions of the document.
2. Authority - The employee's position can be used to prove whether or not the individual is authorized to request the contents of the e-mail. For example, since an administrative assistant does not usually have the authority to purchase a fleet of limousines, an e-mailed document from him or her probably would not be a binding contract.
Other technical solutions include monitoring and surveillance products that allow employers to view and record what function the computer is performing. One such company, SpectorSoft, designs products that have home applications as well for parents wishing to keep track of what their children are doing online.
Products range from those that record every activity on the computer down to the second, to those that assist in remote solutions (i.e., one product allows an employer or parent to access reports when that individual is physically away from the business or home).
Do workers suspect or know with certainty that monitoring is taking place, or what the issues are? It varies from company to company.
According to one analyst in the marketing department at Aetna Life & Casualty who spoke on condition of anonymity: “As far as Aetna goes - oh, boy do they monitor what e-mail and Internet sites we use. We are required to take an annual IT security exam [via e-mail]. The system stores who took the exam, and when. Everyone who passes then gets a certificate to print out as proof of compliance. The exam covers things like the rights and wrongs of Internet usage, the company's e-mail policy, security and electronic storage of data. There is a unit of IT that patrols this as well as our compliance area.”
Aetna not only clearly communicates the company policy but takes additional precautions as well by applying technical solutions. Aetna spokesman Fred Laberge notes that Aetna employees who attempt to surf for pornographic sites receive a warning message on their monitor. If the warning is ignored, a supervisor is notified.
Despite much recent publicity, the monitoring and surveillance of e-mail and Internet use is a topic fraught with anonymity and secrecy. Most individuals contacted for this story insisted on anonymity, while others were required to obtain permission before disclosing either his name or policy information. Still others would not discuss the topic at all because of their involvement in the surveillance.
Like the Aetna employee, an SBC manager agreed to discuss the issue but preferred not to give her name - again, for “political reasons.” She did explain of her company that, “Up until recently, Internet usage for any reasons other than strict business applications was forbidden, actually blocked by a software product. Only recently have the rules been relaxed a bit.”
Even though the rules have been clearly defined and communicated at SBC, according to the manager, some employees defied the policy by accessing pornography sites and were fired. In July Dow Chemical dismissed 50 employees for online abuses, and last fall Xerox Corp. fired 40 workers last for viewing sexual material. Unlike public employees involved in misuse, these individuals are not identified; they are simply dismissed.
Another difference between the private and public sectors is in the requirement of communicated monitoring and surveillance policies.
Spencer Miller, a network specialist in the Network Services/Information Technology Services Department for the Connecticut State University System, acknowledges that the institution “currently has the capability to monitor e-mail and Internet usage. However, the extent of our monitoring efforts are limited to monitoring usage - not content - unless justified through an infraction of security or inappropriate usage. There is a policy that monitoring may be done at any time,” he says.
Dissemination of information regarding surveillance is undertaken because, “As a state entity, we are required to notify employees of our ability to monitor e-mail and Internet usage.”
State government in Connecticut likewise employs technical solutions to the problem of misuse by means of a daily reminder on employee computer monitors warning that e-mail and Internet usage may be monitored, according to personnel administrator Jim Tracy.
What happens to public employees caught viewing inappropriate material? In Connecticut there have been two legislative aides, a police lieutenant, and an elementary school vice principal charged with the offense. Unlike in the corporate world, all were identified - but none were fired. Punishments also varied from suspension to demotion to salary reduction.
While no perfect solutions exist, consistent policies should be established and enforced so that businesses can operate efficiently, productively and profitably. The wisest decision for employees at every level is to use these productive and powerful communication tools for business purposes at business, and for personal purposes out of the office. Of course, most people engage in non-business activities at work occasionally, but employees should use good judgment and assume that Big Brother may be watching. BNH
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
