![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
||
| Is Big
Brother watching you? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What lengths
are our employers going to in order to protect their information? Whether you have just a phone connection at work or more gadgets than you can shake a stick at, the chances are thatwhat you say and what you do are being kept on record. If you have access
to the internet, phone, email, or fax machines then it really is about
time that you paid some serious attention to what you are saying and
who you are saying it to. However, as recently as May 22nd, 2001 the Home Office has denied that it has any plans to order ISP's to operate in this way, although Home Secretary Jack Straw has admitted that serious consideration has to be given to this. Many claim that this type of action is wholly justified if criminal investigations of all levels are going to be initiated, despite the clear potential for violating our human rights. Another major objection that is expected on the part of many UK organisations is that the cost of having to store up to seven years of data, will, for many companies prove to be potentially crippling on their business. Work
Security and Privacy Although many of you are probably not aware, the Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations came into force last month. These regulations were viewed by many to be a 'carte blanche ' for companies and organisations to snoop on staff. The regulations do allow businesses to intercept and monitor emails, telephone calls and use of the internet without getting the consent of the employee, but this has to be for certain 'legitimate' purposes. The legitimate purposes are laid out as follows:
The danger here is clear. The remit here seems to be rather wide and therefore most employers will be able to take it upon themselves to justify intercepting and monitoring the work behaviour of their employees under just one of the above. You must also be aware that while your employer is not required by law to tell you that your calls and messages may be intercepted they are still required to make sure that 'all reasonable efforts' are made to let you know that such activity is going on. Naturally we are following in the footsteps of the United States with taking the initiative over workplace related data-capture. Only very recently the American Management Association published its annual survey on workplace monitoring and surveillance. The survey found that 78 per cent of large U.S. firms are recording and reviewing their employees' electronic communications. This surveillance includes the storage and review of telephone conversations, voice-mail and e-mail messages, and computer files. Employers are also reportedly monitoring internet connections and video taping employee performance. However, the majority of the monitoring that took place was in the form of spot-checking employees rather than 24-hour surveillance, and of those who took part in the survey, 90 per cent said that they inform their employees that the monitoring is taking place. Most concerning was the revelation that two thirds of the employers have disciplined employees for abuse of office e-mail or the internet, and more than one third have dismissed employees for such abuse. Monitoring was also found to be most popular in the financial sector with 92 per cent of firms monitoring their employees, and least popular in public administration. Are you scared? Is this really Big Brother? The Data Protection Act 1998 was introduced to ensure that all your personal data is processed in a manner that is lawful and fair and therefore should your employer monitor your communications then it should not intrude on the employees' 'privacy and autonomy'. The code makes it clear that employers should not monitor the content of calls and emails and that private messages should not be opened. Will
I always be listened to? What about the Human Rights Act? This brings in a very important subject…. The Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act gives us all a right to privacy for private and family life, and the Human Rights Act can be quoted even when employers are working within the guidelines of the regulations stated above. Yes, you've guessed it; even the Human Rights Act has exceptions. Namely, if your employer feels that they are acting for the prevention of crime, or in the interests of national security (also crime related) then they are justified. The courts have still yet to be fully tested on a number of workplace privacy related issues, but to coin a phrase 'it's only a matter of time'. But where do I stand? The policy should also not be kept under lock and key, as it should have been fully circulated within the organisation. Should your organisation be uncooperative regarding this matter and you have a fair reason to question this (i.e., they have issued disciplinary actions although there is no sight of a policy) then it would be sensible to contact your local Citizen's Advice Bureau who should be able to point you in the right direction of an employment solicitor. Conclusion While we are all aware that many calls are monitored for training purposes, there are surely many that aren't monitored for that reason. So please take it upon yourself to know your rights, so take this checklist away with you:
Keep your finger on the pulse of legal developments and their response as the law and the way that the law is enforced are under a lot of scrutiny at present - and the Data Protection Registrar is looking to strengthen the case of the employee! The Home Office has denied it has any plans to order ISPs to retain data traffic for seven years to aid police forces in their fight against crime. The statement came
in response to a wave of speculation that Home Secretary Jack Straw
will recommend a seven-year mandatory retention period for ISPs at next
week's EU Council of Ministers meeting to discuss cross-border co-operation
on crime. "The general policy of the UK government is that there are
no plans to do so at this stage. Serious consideration would have to
be given to such a move, taking into account not only law enforcement,
but also the needs of ISPs and civil liberties issues," said a Home
Office spokesman. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||