|
|||||||||||
|
RE: e-mail policies
From: Tim Heagarty <tim(at)heagarty.com>
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 21:57:10 EST
Well, if the company really believes that occasional use is ok, then why would they want to terminate someone who is occasionally using the system for personal mail? If they have *good* reasons to terminate, then they should use those, not some selectively-enforced ultra-strict rule. They aren't going to terminate based on just occasional use, they are going to use the policy and its violation as one more plank in the platform built against the subject. Violation of the policy is a *good* reason when they get to court, and it can be a good reason to stay out of court. We had complaints of an associate playing email games all day but couldn't prove it during routine work surveillance. I was asked to setup a BCC: on his email so a copy of everything would go to his boss. The boss called in an hour and begged me to shut if off as he couldn't get anything done on his own system. The HR rep printed out a day's worth of email and dropped it on his desk between himself, the associate and the associate's legal counsel. The lawyer turned to the associate and told him to take his severance package and go home which saved everyone a bunch of time and money. Presumably... otherwise they'd be doing a good job. >but your AUP won't be one of the
The original poster was looking for ways to detect infidelity while retaining some sort of respect for privacy -- not for a tool that would help justify terminations. Unless things change drastically in American business I don't think there's going to be much respect for anything, let alone privacy. Why are the security policies there in the first place? To have something to measure security procedures and standards against, and punish improper behavior. It is much easier for business to say "Don't ever do that!" rather than to say "Well, it's ok, but don't do it too much.". Most employees just don't know what "too much" is and will fight the definition in court if it ever comes to that. Tim H. -- MarkReceived on Thu Feb 27 12:48:19 2003 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:03:50 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||