Employer opening mail

38141

Can an employer lawfully open someone's mail that is addressed to them personally at their work address?

ondafly

yes !

crosstownk

If its addressed to your work address then the employer is entitled to assume that it is work related. If the mail is of a sensitive and personal nature you should have it posted to your home address.

DOLEMAN

I doubt there is a law protecting people who send personal letters to the wrong address, but even if there was, I seriously doubt if any solicitor is going to take your case regarding an employer opening one of your letters...

In an old job I used to open the post. I always assumed all letters were work related. I don't think this is unreasonable.

PowerHouseDan

ops wrong topic

DOLEMAN

Hang on are we talking about postal mail or e-mail?

Your work e-mail is absolutely your employers property.

38141

I'm talking postal mail, i know email is their property

i71jskz5xu42pb

38141 wrote:

Can an employer lawfully open someone's mail that is addressed to them personally at their work address?

I'd say no. I was under the impression that it was an offence to open mail addressed to someone else. Wikipedia makes mention of it but I can't find anything more concrete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail#Rules_and_etiquette

(I'm assuming ye olde mail here, not email)

DublinWriter

I worked for a large-ish insurance company about 6 years ago and every morning the building 'manager' would use a glass walled office and tip out all the mail and open it.

I'd don't know why he was doing this, he never appeared to read the mail, I think it was just a control thing.

Slinky>

There is a concern for some companies that you will have items posted from outside EU with customs owing and the carrier will be chasing the company for the customs.

I used to work with a girl who was driven mad by the boss opening 'her' mail, why she cared I dont know, if its personal it goes to your house if its work related why worry?

Heinrich

I could never understand why people use the office as an extension to their home. Admittedly it is great to have free web, email, pens, paper, stamps and the like but it is a form of stealing. You are paid to do a job.

Ginger

A lot of companies have a policy that the mail is opened by admin staff and then delivered to you.

The place I used to work in would always open mail but not parcels because if they would ask you to collect them from the front desk especially if you told them you were expecting one . It was an IT firm so they were worried that if they opened a hardware package they might damage it. They were used to people to also getting personal deliveries that had to be signed for.

Get personal mail deliverd home, and work mail delivered to work

leeroybrown

PaschalNee wrote:

I'd say no. I was under the impression that it was an offence to open mail addressed to someone else.

It's very easy for an employer to say that if their business is receiving mail for an employee then it is work related and that any work related mail is their property and can be opened by them.

Heinrich wrote:

I could never understand why people use the office as an extension to their home.

I get any personal mail or parcels that I know I will need to sign for during working hours as I will be unable to receive them otherwise.

Scotty #

"The Post Office Act" Section 54 (Irish Statute Book)

(1) If any person not in the employment of the Postmaster-General wilfully and maliciously, with intent to injure any other person, either opens or causes to be opened any letter which ought to have been delivered to that other person, or does any act or thing whereby the due delivery of the letter to that other person is prevented or impeded, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding six months.

As the letter is intended for the employee and not the employer, his actions are illegal. Email is now covered by the same act.

Wishbone Ash

Scotty # wrote:

"The Post Office Act" Section 54 (Irish Statute Book)

(1) If any person not in the employment of the Postmaster-General wilfully and maliciously, with intent to injure any other person, either opens or causes to be opened any letter which ought to have been delivered to that other person, or does any act or thing whereby the due delivery of the letter to that other person is prevented or impeded, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding six months.

As the letter is intended for the employee and not the employer, his actions are illegal. Email is now covered by the same act.

IMO that only applies to mail prior to arriving at it's intended destination. Once it has been delivered it is no longer an offence. Mail arriving at an employers office can be opened by any authorised person.

Scotty #

Wishbone Ash wrote:

IMO that only applies to mail prior to arriving at it's intended destination. Once it has been delivered it is no longer an offence. Mail arriving at an employers office can be opened by any authorised person.

If any person not in the employment of the Postmaster-General wilfully and maliciously, with intent to injure any other person, either opens or causes to be opened any letter which ought to have been delivered to that other person, or does any act or thing whereby the due delivery of the letter to that other person is prevented or impeded, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding six months.

leeroybrown

So essentially the right of an employer to open letters addressed to employees is going to come down to how this legislation is interpreted. Does anyone here have any idea what is the current interpretation is or if specific advice has been given by IBEC or another employers group?

secret_squirrel

An interesting question for the legal discussion forum methinks!

Wishbone Ash

Scotty # wrote:

If any person not in the employment of the Postmaster-General wilfully and maliciously, with intent to injure any other person, either opens or causes to be opened any letter which ought to have been delivered to that other person, or does any act or thing whereby the due delivery of the letter to that other person is prevented or impeded, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds, or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding six months.

Once the postal staff has delivered the mail to the employer it is considered to have been delivered. Internal distribution of mail is not considered to be a delivery. If you read your post again you will see that this legislation applies to mail prior to having been delivered.

MAIL IS DELIVERED TO AN ADDRESS NOT A PERSON. (unless registered).

Scotty #

leeroybrown wrote:

So essentially the right of an employer to open letters addressed to employees is going to come down to how this legislation is interpreted. Does anyone here have any idea what is the current interpretation is or if specific advice has been given by IBEC or another employers group?

While searching for this legislation I came across it in a Dail question time where someone was asking the Minister for Post & Telegraph if he is aware that mail to some students in boarding schools was being intercepted and opened by the school authorities, and the action, if any, that will be taken if such cases are brought to his attention. His reply was to quote the act above.

The legislation clearly states that if the letter is intercepted before it arrives at the intended PERSON , not building, company, etc, then it is an offence.

Wishbone Ash

Scotty # wrote:

While searching for this legislation I came across it in a Dail question time where someone was asking the Minister for Post & Telegraph if he is aware that mail to some students in boarding schools was being intercepted and opened by the school authorities, and the action, if any, that will be taken if such cases are brought to his attention. His reply was to quote the act above.

The legislation clearly states that if the letter is intercepted before it arrives at the intended PERSON , not building, company, etc, then it is an offence.

I totally agree that mail addressed to a student at a boarding school should not be opened or a patient in a hospital or a hotel guest etc. but the OP was referring to a workplace address which is totally different.

Scotty #

Wishbone Ash wrote:

I totally agree that mail addressed to a student at a boarding school should not be opened or a patient in a hospital or a hotel guest etc. but the OP was referring to a workplace address which is totally different.

Its not different at all. The letter is addressed to a particular person and is the property of that person only.

BTW, (and I know this sounds strange, but its true) In the eyes of the law a letter or email is deemed delivered the second its been posted.

TempestSabre

I can't see how any of that would work unless it means delivered to a person. If you share a house or a business premises with other business'es it could mean that anyone could legally open your mail. Its also would mean that anyone can interfere with your mail onces its been posted. None of that makes sense.

I would assume that the legislation is intended to stop people opening mail not addressed to them.

Wishbone Ash

Scotty # wrote:

Its not different at all. The letter is addressed to a particular person and is the property of that person only.

BTW, (and I know this sounds strange, but its true) In the eyes of the law a letter or email is deemed delivered the second its been posted.

Somehow I can't imagine our Taoiseach spending hours each day opening all the mail adressed to him! According to you interpretation of the law, his staff will be guilty of a misdemeanour if they do it.

You may argue that it's OK if consent is given but how would you apply that in a situation where the adressee is unable to give consent because for example:

(a) they are a child?
(b) they are of unsound mind?
(c) they have an intellectual disability?

Do you realistically expect the relatives/next of kin of babies, those suffering from mentally degenerative conditions and the mentally handicapped to miss, for example, vital hospital appointments or state benefits because no-one is allowed to open and read their post.

I must inform my 3 year old that she must read her own post from now on.

TempestSabre

I assume the powers of guardian, attorney or whatever its called, would come into play there, no?

seamus

TempestSabre wrote:

I can't see how any of that would work unless it means delivered to a person. If you share a house or a business premises with other business'es it could mean that anyone could legally open your mail.

The interesting part of the legislation that Scotty quoted is "wilfully and maliciously, with intent to injure any other person,". Thus, it's perfectly fine to open someone's else's mail, provided that in opening it, you're not intending to use the information inside against that person. So long as the mail still gets delivered to the addressee in a timely manner, then no offence has been committed. That's how I read the piece that Scotty quoted.

So if an employer is simply interested in knowing every piece of information going in and out of his business (it's his right to know this, after all), then it's actually quite reasonable for him to open employee mail, so that he doesn't miss what clients/suppliers are saying.

This would also cover the opening of mail for absent/sick/disabled relatives, whether you live at their address or not.

homah_7ft

secret_squirrel wrote:

An interesting question for the legal discussion forum methinks!

This is an interesting one alright. Maybe mens rea would come into the equation?

seamus

Actually, on the boarding school front, I can't see how they could justify that. Clearly the only reason for reading students' mail is use that information for the school's own gain. Especially with the history of boarding schools*, they could find themselves in big trouble for this.

*In times gone by, students would sit down every Sunday evening and write letters home. This proceeding would be watched over by teachers, and in some cases the students had to read their letters aloud to the rest of the class. The intention was to ensure that students were writing clearly and spelling properly (and therefore being taught properly), but it also had the secondary effect of preventing the students from making complaints about teachers or conditions. You're not going to tell your parents that you're homesick, being bullied, or being sexually abused, if your peers/teachers are reading the letter.

parsi

Well if you do something wrong at work your employer is liable. If you get mail at work then it is reasonable to expect that it is being sent to you in your capacity as an employee rather than as an individual.

Personal mail gets sent to home. Mail that arrives Mr J.Jones, Johnson Ltd, is actually for Johnson Ltd rather than for J.Jones...

Mail is delivered to a destination (the address) rather than the addressee.

Stark

parsi wrote:

Mail is delivered to a destination (the address) rather than the addressee.

Out of curiosity, what implications does that have if you're living with people in a house-share situation?

whizzbang

Is there an element of "Duty of care" that suggests an employeer has to open mail to make sure its safe? Health and safety and all that?