Internet usage in the workplace

• Internet usage in the workplace: Part 1

• Internet usage in the workplace: Part 2

• Internet usage in the workplace: Part 3

The internet - do you or don't you?: Part 1

Some time ago, we published a series of articles in our newsletter regarding your employees’ use of the internet and your electronic and communications equipment, such as e-mail, telephone and fax facilities.

We still receive a number of e-mail  enquiries via our website from employers who seem to be experiencing difficulty with employees surfing the internet and making use of the employer’s e-mail facility for correspondence with family and friends.

Indeed, we also receive a number of enquiries from employees, demanding to know what action they can take against an employer who has read their private e-mails and has thus "violated my right to privacy."

When  the employer attempts to monitor the use of his e-mail facility, he is confronted by employees who maintain that he is violating their right to privacy and that the employer has no legal authority to read their private e- mails.

So what then is the position?

Firstly, let us have a look at what employees can do, and probably are doing, with your company time for which they are being paid, and also what are they doing with your e-mail facilities which you provide for business purposes?

Employees can be wasting your time simply "surfing the Net", playing games on the internet, either with themselves or with other employees, they could be wasting company time by going into chat rooms, they might also be running their own little sideline business by using your facilities.

Then there is the other more serious side, such as downloading or distribution of pornographic material, other undesirable material which may be political or racist in content ,  distributing dirty jokes, or even giving away trade secrets to a competitor for personal gain. They might even be very quietly e-mailing your customer data base, pricing structures and so on to their own private e-mail addresses, having the intention of later resigning and starting a business in opposition to you.

These are only some of the reasons why the employer needs to have full and total control over his electronic communications equipment, which includes telephone and fax facilities.

There is still not a large amount of case law existing on employees misuse of  the employer's facilities in this respect.

Probably the most well-known case is a that of Jacqueline Bamford and four others who were employed by Energizer (SA) Ltd, and who were dismissed in October 2000 on grounds of having repeatedly violated company policy and procedure regarding the use of the employer's electronic mail system, using in the employer's facilities for receiving and for distributing pornographic material and jokes, and for violating company procedures.

The employees involved in this case maintain that the employer did not have any rules in place in respect of the alleged e-mail abuse, they maintained that they did not send chain letters over the system, and they maintained further that there was inconsistency on the part of the employer in the application of discipline -  and of course the very famous one - they maintained that the employer had violated their right to privacy in intercepting their private e-mails.

This case was reported on  by  Tony Healy in the Star Newspaper workplace supplement on October 10th, 2001.

An important point emerging from this case was that the arbitrator concluded that individuals do not have an automatic right to utilise the employer's facilities for the purpose of personal and private communications,  and then not expect to their employer to read these communications during the course of his monitoring the use of his equipment.

Employees should be made to understand, if they do not already understand, that the internet is public domain, and no employee is entitled to utilise his employer's business equipment, which is provided to the employee for business purposes, to further his own personal and private interests.

Every employer has the right to insist that are the resources with which he provides his employees are to be used strictly and solely for business purposes, and that the personal or private use thereof is strictly forbidden. 

Employees must also understand that they should never use the internet for the transmission of personal and private communications if they do not want outside parties to be privy to those communications, and perhaps even more importantly, employees must be made to understand that upon entering the employer's premises, a large part of their "right to privacy" is forfeited whilst they are under the direction and control of the employer.

The first understanding that employees must have is that upon entering the employer’s premises, the employee immediately comes under the control and direction of the employer.

The employee is no longer In a position to do as he/she pleases, and one consequence of this is that the employee does not have an exclusive “right to privacy”, and especially in terms of using the employer’s resources and equipment.

The employee enters the premises in terms of a contractual arrangement, and then only with the permission of the employer.

The employee is then expected to embark on executing his agreed duties in terms of any contractual arrangement and applicable job description, whether written or verbal.

I do not know of any employer who grants permission to his employees to enter his premises and attend to their private affairs using the employer’ resources.

Prevention is always better than cure. It is acknowledged that some preventive measures do not always have the desired effect, but nonetheless preventive measures to have great value.

The wise employer will make it a condition of employment, embodied in the employment contract (as opposed to just a normal company rule or regulation in the employee handbook) that private use of the company electronic communications facilities, including the internet, e-mail, fax and telephone, is prohibited. It should be further stated in the employment contract that should the employee breach this clause, disciplinary action will follow which may lead to dismissal.

It is far more effective to prohibit private use altogether, rather than to have a regulation permitting private use under certain conditions.

Those certain conditions will, in the event of disciplinary action, give rise to argument about whether the employee’s breach does in fact constitute a breach of that  condition.

Much argument will ensue on the interpretation of the rule – the employee will argue that his interpretation was “this and this and this”  and the employer will argue that the meaning is “that and that and that.”

The employer will argue “if the employee was in doubt, why didn’t he ask??”  and the employee will argue that he was not in doubt, he genuinely was convinced that his interpretation was correct – an on and on it goes.

So why put in place a rule that is only going to cause problems and be challenged when it comes under the spotlight ?

Make a hard and fast rule that nobody can misunderstand and that does not lend itself to possible mis-interpretation.

Private use is prohibited – end of story.

Some may argue that this is harsh. Others may argue that such a rule is impossible to implement, and that employees will use the facilities – and particularly the e-mail, for private use.

We know that – employees break the rules with alarming regularity. This we know.

But if the employer wishes to ensure that his employees are being productive, are not wasting time valuable company time that the employee is being paid for, that employees  are complying with terms and conditions of employment, then the employer must have rules and regulations in place, and he must embody prohibitive clauses in the employment contact, and above all, he must monitor the staff usage of the equipment and resources that are provided for business purposes.

The Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-related Information Act, 2002, does in fact grant permission to certain persons to intercept indirect communications under certain circumstances.

This is the final part of our series on employees and the internet. 

The main issues around whether or not the employer can intercept (read, download, etc ) employees e-mails are clarified in the Regulation of Interception of Communications and provision of Communication-related information Act, 2002, (the Act) and of course other sources, not the least of which is accepted custom and practice.

If an employer provides resources for business purposes, then he is entitled to prohibit private use of those resources.

An employer is entitled to expect his employees to come to work to carry out their contractual duties – not to attend to private affairs.

I know of at least one employee who contacted me, enquiring whether it was fair labour practice for an employer to refuse to grant a rest period of 30 minutes morning and afternoon, in addition to meal and tea breaks because “we work in a very stressful environment.”  Can you believe it ??

If employees can’t take the heat, then they must stay out of the kitchen. If employees want to rest, then go to bed earlier.

The Act states, in Chapter 2, Part1 section 5 , that any person other than a law enforcement officer, may intercept any communication if one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent in writing to such interception.

The first thing then that the employer needs to do is to include a clause in the employment contract to the effect all electronic communications equipment is provided by the employer for business purposes, and that private use thereof is prohibited.

The second thing is that the employer must include a clause in the employment contract, stating that , in accepting employment with (name of Company), the employee agrees that the employer will from time to time intercept all e-mails communications, that are sent or received by the employee.

The Act also makes the following provision : (Chapter 2 , Part1 section 6 sub-paragraph 1)

“Any person may, in the course of carrying on any business, intercept any indirect communication (e-mail) :

a)       by means of which a transaction is entered into in the course of that business.

b)       Which otherwise relates to that business

c)       Which otherwise take place in the course of the carrying on of that business in the course of its transmission over a telecommunications system.

 The Act states further (sub-paragraph 2) that a person may intercept an indirect communication (e-mail)

 d)       in order to establish the existence of facts

e)       for purposes of investigating or detecting the unauthorized use of that telecommunications system

The above provisions – from a)  to  e) are the reason why the employer stipulates that all electronic communications equipment is provided for business purposes only, and that private use is prohibited.  

and includes further

 a)       if the telecommunications system concerned is provided for use wholly or partly in connection with that business

b)       if the system controller has made all reasonable efforts to inform in advance a person who intends to use the telecommunications system concerned, that indirect communications transmitted by means thereof may be intercepted or if such indirect communication is intercepted with the express or implied consent of the person who uses that telecommunications system.

The above provisions cover the employer in that the employee has been informed in the employment contract.

To summarize, the employer is entitled to stipulate (and indeed should stipulate) in the employment contract that all electronic communications equipment is provided for business use only and that private use is prohibited, further that interception of communications shall take place from time to time , and that any breach of these requirements shall result in disciplinary action which may lead to dismissal.

For further enquiries, contact Derek Jackson on advice@labourguide.co.za

The South African Labour Guide is a private company and has no association with the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), you may find the CCMA on www.ccma.org.za