Boards.ie

**castie** · 18-01-2012, 17:21

Just curious.

What rights do employee's have to prviacy if any with internal instant messaging across a company network?

demanufactured · 18-01-2012, 17:23

None

Marcusm · 18-01-2012, 18:56

With an employer messaging system you should not have an expectation of privacy to the extent that the disclosure is work related, ie relevant employees can examine your messages but they should not disclose them to other members of staff (or of the public) without a genuine reason. For example, you might disclose that a close relative has developed cancer in an email to a colleague. An IT staff member might become privy to this information but disclosing it would likely be a disciplinary matter.

Ms Minnie Mouse · 18-01-2012, 19:09

None. However, the people who can access your information have a duty to only disclose what is necessary where necessary. However, just remember that gossip travels. Don't discuss anything on business networks, whether IM or emails, that you wouldn't want people to know.

Thoie · 18-01-2012, 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ms Minnie Mouse

None. However, the people who can access your information have a duty to only disclose what is necessary where necessary. However, just remember that gossip travels. Don't discuss anything on business networks, whether IM or emails, that you wouldn't want people to know.

"What is necessary, where necessary" could include inappropriate remarks to a colleague that would constitute a breach of the company code of conduct - sexual harassment, bullying, etc.

In reality if the company is relatively large, no-one's going to go looking unless there's been a complaint.

coylemj · 19-01-2012, 00:02

While the right to privacy may be a legitimate topic for discussion, what sanction (if any) or potential action for redress (if any) does the OP have if his 'right' (if it exists) to privacy is breached?

I can see that people are trying to extend intra-company communication to potential bullying and/or sexual harrassment, let's keep it to the issue of privacy which is the only thing the OP mentioned.

18-01-2012, 17:21	#1
castie Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 3,449 Adverts \| Friends Mod: BAPS, Cork City	Internal Company IM's Just curious. What rights do employee's have to prviacy if any with internal instant messaging across a company network?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

18-01-2012, 17:23	#2
demanufactured Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: athlone Posts: 2,738 Adverts \| Friends	None

18-01-2012, 18:56	#3
Marcusm Registered User Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 2,522 Adverts \| Friends	With an employer messaging system you should not have an expectation of privacy to the extent that the disclosure is work related, ie relevant employees can examine your messages but they should not disclose them to other members of staff (or of the public) without a genuine reason. For example, you might disclose that a close relative has developed cancer in an email to a colleague. An IT staff member might become privy to this information but disclosing it would likely be a disciplinary matter.

18-01-2012, 19:09	#4
Ms Minnie Mouse Registered User Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: South Dublin/North Wicklow Posts: 104 Adverts \| Friends	None. However, the people who can access your information have a duty to only disclose what is necessary where necessary. However, just remember that gossip travels. Don't discuss anything on business networks, whether IM or emails, that you wouldn't want people to know.

19-01-2012, 00:02	#6
coylemj Registered User Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dublin Posts: 9,415 Adverts \| Friends	While the right to privacy may be a legitimate topic for discussion, what sanction (if any) or potential action for redress (if any) does the OP have if his 'right' (if it exists) to privacy is breached? I can see that people are trying to extend intra-company communication to potential bullying and/or sexual harrassment, let's keep it to the issue of privacy which is the only thing the OP mentioned.