don't tell us the law

dade

Not sure if this should be in PI or work/Jobs. feel free to move if necessary.

working for a law firm in Dublin as their IT manager.

When i was originally recruited the managing partner said basically i had free reign over all systems and any and all suggestions would be taken on board and discussed, which is fair enough.

about 6 months ago the managing partner went into semi retirement and someone else filled his shoes. since then it's been an uphill struggle. The company had no content filtering in place what so ever and for the first year i continually suggested it. when the new guy took over I had a review and he asked why i kept bringing it up. I said the company had a legal obligation to protect all employees form images or content that may cause offence. his response "don't tell us the law we know the law". I then went onto say that these filters also help protect against spy ware, virus attacks etc. his response "sure that's all scaremongering"

Today a different partner starts the same crap. he asked why a site was blocked (a legit one), i told him it wasn't to my knowledge but could he tell me the message displayed when he tried access it. he said no and all partners should have full access to the Internet. I said actually no, it was agreed with the managing partner that partners would have elevated rights but would still e blocked from nudity, race/hate and advertising sites. he laughed I said that the company has an obligation to protect its employees from this material. All employees. he said "I am the company I'm not going to sue myself now am i" i said no but someone else that views it can, he said "do i tell you how IT works ? well don't tell me the law I know the law.


I'm thinking it's time to pack up and just move on. the position was good from a career point of view (my first management role) but I think that it will be bad for the career in the long run, I'll either punch one of their lights out and end up fired or loose my skills and keep current.

Sangre

How does this obligation apply to employees who use the internet? Never heard of it applied in that context. Surely it only would apply to posters or something the employee has no choice to look at.

Are you telling me a company that has unrestricted internet access for an employee(s) is in breach of employee welfare legislation?

Beruthiel

Moved to Work & Jobs

skelliser

I Didnt Break The Law, I Am The Law!!!

dade

Sangre wrote: »

How does this obligation apply to employees who use the internet? Never heard of it applied in that context. Surely it only would apply to posters or something the employee has no choice to look at.

my understanding is that simply by having it on screen is a risk to the company, someone may walk by and view it by simply looking at a screen as they pass by. there is no difference to it being on screen to it being hung on a wall.

Sangre wrote: »

Are you telling me a company that has unrestricted Internet access for an employee(s) is in breach of employee welfare legislation?

from my understanding of it is yes, if person A decided it was cool to have a screen saver of naked women, then employee B (a woman) could sue the company if she deems it inappropriate. likewise email content with images etc on them. likewise if an email contains a racist/hate comment and someone views they can sue the company as the company has an obligation to protect against that kind of material.

that's my understanding anyway, i could be wrong.


but my underlining problem is not that they don't want to protect the company, it's their money and reputation if they are sued. it's the attitude toward me, I've put my time in and to be told that I don't know my job, that we make stuff up just to scare people etc is kinda frustrating. i feel like just telling them to shove their job but alas Mr Bank manager wont side with me when the mortgage doesn't get paid.

leahcim

I think you are taking what the partners decide too personally.

All you can do as an employee is tell your superiors what you consider best practice and the reasons why. (BTW I agree they should have content filtering)

for the first year I continually suggested it

when the new guy took over I had a review and he asked why i kept bringing it up

From the quotation above it sounds like you have been on to them for a while to introduce content filtering, probably to the level of annoying them. My attitude would be its their company if they want to have un-censored internet access so be it.

I would be very surprised if a solicitor (especially somebody who is at partner level) does not understand the human resources risks the internet poises and I can see how it would get their backs up when some IT guy tries to preach to them.

If an employees or client takes legal action against them because someone sees some nudity on one of the computers, that’s their problem not yours.

You have done your duty and giving them your professional opinion.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

dade

i mentioned it twice over 9 months and each time i gave them a tame example of what was being sent via email so as not to offend (still managed to offend someone though)

like you said i have done my job, but i guess what eats at me is that "we know it all" attitude i guess and what i perceive is him being condescending.

maybe a job as a road sweeper where i don't have to deal with that sort of attitude.

MagicMarker

If i was your boss and head of the company and YOU told ME i couldn't have full net access i'd be pissed off too.

They're the boss, they get special treatment. No matter where you go this will be the case.

barbiegirl

I worked selling content filtering solution for a couple of years. Your experience is not new, the "scaremongering" and sure it's fine is attitude is everywhere. My understanding is that you are right and the company is directly responsible for any offensive material on their network, also for illegal downloads and illegal content. Under the latest legislation the directors are personally responsible, not just professionally.
My advise though, having had similar issues in a job, in terms of attitude, leave. The IT industry is understaffed and theri are plenty of opportunities for good candidates.

BuffyBot

TBH, I'd say get over it. It's their company, so what they decide goes ultimately

rick_fantastic

give them what they want. period....

you can still have a protected network and allow people to surf the web.

come up with a proper internet usage and email policy if you dont already have one.

this is for the masses, not the people who pay your wages.....

i block certain mime types and most of what in dans guardian black lists

you can spam filter your mail using something like spam assassin....

dont do it for the management team though. they can surf whatever they want.

i also block all webmail for users.....

dont go in all guns blazing telling them what they need to do.

the indirect approach and letting them feel like they made a decision is all part of the game. put together a plan and show them you've really thought this out...

dade

MagicMarker wrote: »

If i was your boss and head of the company and YOU told ME i couldn't have full net access i'd be pissed off too.

even if you are actually upholding the law? at the end of the day I have as IT manager an obligation to protect employees from this type of content. I also have an obligation to protect against security risks. you could be damn sure that if someone did sue over seeing porn or recieveing a racist email or a virus did infect the system they'd pink slip me for letting it happen.

BuffyBot wrote: »

TBH, I'd say get over it. It's their company, so what they decide goes ultimately

so let me get this straight, you know your role and obligations and are constantly told you are wrong in both what you are doing and should do by individuals that have no background in your field and i should get over it? OK so.

i agree that "it's their business" and i should leave well enough alone but then why the hell agree to implement the system in the first place. and i know that if something did happen they'd try hold me responsible.

anyway off to update the CV for the new year LOL, anyone recommend good agencies for IT people

justsomebloke

Just make sure you have email confirmation of you suggesting that they should have content filtering and them replying that they don't want it.
As they are solicitors they will be able to deal with any of the ramifications that may come from other people in the office looking at stuff they shouldn't be and others taking offense.

leahcim

If somebody did take legal action over dodgy content on their web or email and they decided pink slip you as a scapegoat you would be able to sue the living be-jeasus (sp?) out of them for unfair dismisal.

Just make make sure you have a couple of emails, documents and witnesses to cover your ass.

padser

dade wrote: »

at the end of the day I have as IT manager an obligation to protect employees from this type of content

No you don't.

As an IT manager you have a responsibility either deal with IT issues or bring all areas of relenence to your expertise to someone higher up in the organisation. You have done that.

It's not up to you to decide (over the wishes of the partners) what action to take. It's their business. If they understand the risks of having unfettered internet access then they are perfectly entitled to take that risk.

Seriously if I was a partner in a law firm - and my IT manager tried to give me legal advice I would go spare. Even with just a 4 year degree in law some of the crap posted here on boards really annoys me because of its sheer stupidity legally. I can only imagine this annoyance would be worse if I was more highly educated in this regard and dealing with an IT manager with a rudimentary knowledge (but clearly not understanding of) of legal issues.

I hope for your sake you are good at the IT aspect of your job.

aCA

dade wrote: »

even if you are actually upholding the law?

There is no law that states a company must have content filtering in place.

dazberry

dade, your mistake here is straight-forward. You need a stakeholder to push these projects/issues with, your previous stakeholder has gone and with them your free reign. All the "I know the law" is BS, but you'll get that in any organisation (relatively speaking) - you just need to find a new approach to get stakeholders on your side - and work it from there.

padser wrote:

Seriously if I was a partner in a law firm - and my IT manager tried to give me legal advice I would go spare. Even with just a 4 year degree in law

Good start.

D.

AARRRGH

dade wrote: »

even if you are actually upholding the law?

Could you find me this law please? You are talking total horse****.

Neither the IT department nor the employer has to implement a content filter. If someone is looking at porn and an employee complains, the porn watcher could get fired. That's it.

dade wrote: »

at the end of the day I have as IT manager an obligation to protect employees from this type of content.

No you don't.

Are you very young? You sound very young.

I don't think you understand what your job is.

You job is to do whatever your boss tells you to do. That's it.

dade wrote: »

I also have an obligation to protect against security risks.

As the IT manager I agree.

dade wrote: »

you could be damn sure that if someone did sue over seeing porn or recieveing a racist email or a virus did infect the system they'd pink slip me for letting it happen.

No...

Why would someone sue for seeing porn or getting a dodgy e-mail? I think you really have a weird idea of what your job is and how the world works...

No offence.

Sangre

Tbh I agree with the sentiment that I think you are overstating the responisiblities and oligations you have as an IT manager.

jhegarty

Sangre wrote: »

Tbh I agree with the sentiment that I think you are overstating the responisiblities and oligations you have as an IT manager.

Anyone thinking the op is a manager of one person ?

the_syco

dublindude wrote: »

Why would someone sue for seeing porn or getting a dodgy e-mail? I think you really have a weird idea of what your job is and how the world works...

OP, find a links to legit sites (newspapers, etc), that show companies getting sued for dodgy emails (women suing after seen a sexist joke, etc).

Sangre

Actually a company with employee constantly sending around naughty emails and pics could be deemed a sexually harrassing environment. Especially if the emails are sexist or degrading to women. Of course this can be counter with fair usage and company policy, it hardly requires the banning of the emails or restriction of the internet.

The Hill Billy

OP - You could point out to the partners that you only wish to introduce 'best practice' within the organisation. If they do not want you to implement this - tough. It is their business - not yours.

I understand that you only wish to do your best for the business. However, you appear to have let it become such a serious issue that I'd imagine that you are putting your job on the line for what is really a piddly point of principle. If I was a partner in that business & one of my employees tried to dictate policy regardless of my wishes - he/she would soon find themselves seeking "new opportunities".

dade

aCA wrote: »

There is no law that states a company must have content filtering in place.

no but a company does have an obligation to protect it's employees from images or content that could cause offence, material of a sexiest, racist or pornographic nature. this is the legislation that I'm talking about, i can't quote the law in the Irish statute (I'm not a lawyer) but does fall under employment law and the protection of the employee. how the company does that is up to them, ours has decided content filtering should be used along with an updated Internet and email usage policy.

dublindude wrote: »

Could you find me this law please? You are talking total horse****.

Neither the IT department nor the employer has to implement a content filter. If someone is looking at porn and an employee complains, the porn watcher could get fired. That's it..

they don't have to implement it but they do have to protect employees from viewing it either through policy or some other method, so companies will go to an extreme and block all Internet access and only allow emails from their own domain name for certain user groups. others will have limited Internet access where by if you role implies a need then you get it, if not you don't. others will apply a filter in its default state and monitor usage, with certain sites will be blocked during work hours but available outside hours and through lunch (this is how we have implemented it, so bebo and so on and webmail are available outside hours and during lunch) , as their previous policy was lax i recommended a change of policy and the implementation of filtering, they where shown a demo of the software and explained its usage and agreed to implement it.

dublindude wrote: »

Are you very young? You sound very young..

what has my age got to do with anything? if i was 97 would it make my points more valid? just because a person is young it doesn't imply that they do not know what they are talking about or do not have an understanding for what they should be doing. age is irrelevant. Experience on the other hand is not and as i already stated this is my first management role, though not my first supervisory role.

dublindude wrote: »

Why would someone sue for seeing porn or getting a dodgy e-mail? I think you really have a weird idea of what your job is and how the world works...

under sexual harassment legislation they can. an employee can sue if they feel demeaned (sp?) or offended in any way. they have a right to work in an environment that is free from such material.

the_syco wrote: »

OP, find a links to legit sites (newspapers, etc), that show companies getting sued for dodgy emails (women suing after seen a sexist joke, etc).

can't at the moment but i will look, however there was an incident last year in the UK where a number of individuals where dismissed over viewing porn it was all over the news if I recall.

Sangre wrote: »

Actually a company with employee constantly sending around naughty emails and pics could be deemed a sexually harrassing environment. Especially if the emails are sexist or degrading to women. Of course this can be counter with fair usage and company policy, it hardly requires the banning of the emails or restriction of the Internet.

not just women, it sounds strange but men can also take action on such grounds but probably not as many men and women do tack such steps.

previously the company had no email or Internet policy. everything and anything was coming in, some of these where down sick (on par with tub girl), one contained a naked picture of a male child with his weenier caught in a flip phone, the caption "don't let your child play with your phone" now i see the funny side of such a picture just like other people do. But it is still a naked child and that should not be circulated by anyone in my opinion.

dazberry wrote: »

dade,you just need to find a new approach to get stakeholders on your side - and work it from there.

yeah i agree, maybe that's the best approach. though considering who's left it may be difficult.

I think people are taking me up wrong, i don't want to lock the whole system down and allow nothing. I think people should be allowed a fair usage of the Internet. my issue is the manner in which partners in the firm, or for that matter any senior manager in any company talks down to people and in my opinion belittle them by talking in a condescending tone as if we are little underlings that work 24/7 just for the company and take verbal abuse.

expediateclimb

Just out of curiosity, do you have an internet usage policy that was signed by the employee's?

AARRRGH

dade wrote: »

no but a company does have an obligation to protect it's employees from images or content that could cause offence, material of a sexiest, racist or pornographic nature. this is the legislation that I'm talking about, i can't quote the law in the Irish statute (I'm not a lawyer) but does fall under employment law and the protection of the employee.

You can't quote this legislation because it doesn't exist.

You really need to cop on. You sound like an awful pain in the hole of an employee tbh.

^-- that's advice btw, not an insult

ntlbell

I haven't read all the replies so sorry if it's all ready being suggested

I had a similar issue with a large company in Ireland and at the start much like you know I tried to convince them I was nearly giving myself an ulcer.

What I did was write up a very long winded report on the network etc.

Planted it on the boss's desk.

Went to my office, put the feet up.

If the phone rang, I would direct people to the boss, who would ring me and I would direct him to the correct page of the report to explain why the problem was happening.

Cover you're own bottom, once you have identified the issue and reported it to the relevant people your covered.

AARRRGH

ntlbell wrote: »

Cover you're own bottom, once you have identified the issue and reported it to the relevant people your covered.

Yep. I use e-mails as my paper trail. Whenever someone attempts to wiggle their way out of their own incompetence, I just point to the e-mail I sent them.

I learnt a long time ago there is no point trying to convince anyone of anything in the workplace. I just make my recommendation and then let them make their own decision...

The Hill Billy

It isn't as if the OP is being asked to do something illegal. He is being told by management that he is not to implement something that he feels may be required.

If the OP feels that he is on a "sticky wicket" legally-speaking he should seek appropriate advice. Which is a waste of time in this instance IMO. He'd be better off getting down off his high horse & let his bosses carry on viewing all the pr0n they want.

AARRRGH

He is trying to quote non existent law to lawyers, and is making a huge deal about it. It's a bit mad really...

dade

dublindude wrote: »

He is trying to quote non existent law to lawyers,

so there is no law that stipulates an employer has an obligation to protect it's employees from things they deem sexual harassing, demeaning, racist, sexist or just plain abusive? I'm no lawyer or employment specialist but I'm pretty certain there is some provision for the above.

again my issue is not that they do or don't filter my issue is how the partners speak to me and relate to me. for example even today i received an email telling me that if the issue was not resolved i would be expected to be on 24/7 call out. now that's not a problem if it was a major issue like complete system failure but call out (with no compensation) for a blocked email.

the software went live around noon yesterday and i was instructed to leave it in its default state. at 9 am i said there was a solution where people could manage their own blocked content via a web console and would configure it. yet at 9.30 I'm told if its not resolved i will be on 24/7 call out to unblock emails. never mind the fact that to do that would be a change in my terms of employment, nor an offer to compensate me for coming in after hours.

i can easily allow all mails to the partners bypass the filter, they did not want that they said leave it in its default for all users even though i had suggested elevated privileges for all partners and have provided those privileges for web browsing already and it's just emails that are getting blocked because they have double extensions or conntain images.

dublindude wrote: »

Yep. I use e-mails as my paper trail. Whenever someone attempts to wiggle their way out of their own incompetence, I just point to the e-mail I sent them.

I've started to do that today, every comment that has to be made I'm doing vial mail to all of them and they are responding in the same way, yesterday it was different they kept walking up to the door.

as i said the issue is not the filtering let them look at all the porn the like maybe they'll even share , i couldn't give a damn about it. its the attitude that i am there at their whim 24/7 and should genuflect or something each time they walk by.

ntlbell

If you don't like their attitude towards you then get a new job.

This doesn't seem to be an issue about filtering or IT it's a clash of personalities.

Live with it, or find somewhere else to work.

AARRRGH

dade wrote: »

so there is no law that stipulates an employer has an obligation to protect it's employees from things they deem sexual harassing, demeaning, racist, sexist or just plain abusive? I'm no lawyer or employment specialist but I'm pretty certain there is some provision for the above.

Haven't you already asked an office of lawyers this?

parsi

dade wrote: »

so there is no law that stipulates an employer has an obligation to protect it's employees from things they deem sexual harassing, demeaning, racist, sexist or just plain abusive? I'm no lawyer or employment specialist but I'm pretty certain there is some provision for the above.

If you want to bring in what would be a considerable change in their current practices vis-a-vis acessing the 'net then you have to prepare a submission. In this submission document the legal requirements (the actual requirements and not the "I'm sure there is.." or "it's my understanding") , the operational benefits etc etc.

If you don't do that then you are pissing in the wind. As an IT manager you have responsibilities but you also have to work with the Business and bring them along to your way of thinking or indeed let them persuade you that their way of thinking is the one to go for. At this stage you'll also have a paper trail and the knowledge that maybe you did focus their mind on the issue.

In the meantime quoting makey-uppy bits of legislation to lawyers seems to be a somewhat strange way of getting things done...

dade

parsi wrote: »

In the meantime quoting make-uppy bits of legislation to lawyers seems to be a somewhat strange way of getting things done...

i agree with everything you have written apart from the above. just because i can't quote chapter and verse the legislation does not mean it does not exist. to my knowledge this legislation does exist, probably falls under protection of employees, or it could also be implied under sexual harassment legislation. hell it could fall under helath safety and welfare or even under equality law like i said I'm no lawyer but hey if that legislation does not exist then happy days considering there is no proper policy in place i can pretty much look at what i want when i want and nothing can be done about it.

parsi

dade wrote: »

i agree with everything you have written apart from the above. just because i can't quote chapter and verse the legislation does not mean it does not exist. to my knowledge this legislation does exist, probably falls under protection of employees, or it could also be implied under sexual harassment legislation. hell it could fall under helath safety and welfare or even under equality law like i said I'm no lawyer but hey if that legislation does not exist then happy days considering there is no proper policy in place i can pretty much look at what i want when i want and nothing can be done about it.

But but but... if you can't prove it exists then you can't get them to act out of fear of it. You're dealing with the experts (supposedly) in this field so probable and implied existence of legislation just isn't going to wash with them.

Your best bet would be to root out cases that bolster your argument in some way and cite them. Even UK cases would help seeing as we are a common law jurisdicion.

The nub of it is that if you want to persuade them to do something then your argument has to be watertight. If they disagree after that well it's their decision.

AARRRGH

dade wrote: »

i agree with everything you have written apart from the above. just because i can't quote chapter and verse the legislation does not mean it does not exist. to my knowledge this legislation does exist, probably falls under protection of employees, or it could also be implied under sexual harassment legislation. hell it could fall under helath safety and welfare or even under equality law like i said I'm no lawyer but hey if that legislation does not exist then happy days considering there is no proper policy in place i can pretty much look at what i want when i want and nothing can be done about it.

You're still really confused.

1. You think the law exists, but you can't prove it exists. Yet you are still cocky enough to say this to an office of lawyers who are telling you they know what the law is and to cop on?

2. You then go on to say if the law doesn't exist you can look at whatever you want and nothing can be done about it. This is such a stupid and immature statement. Really you sound like a total pain in the arse of an employee.

monkey tennis

OP, you keep beating the drum of this phantom legislation, but you seem to be missing the point that it's irrelevant. The bottom line is that if this law exists in the first place, it's the problem of the guy who owns/runs the business, not yours. You've given your opinion, and been overruled (if you'll pardon the play on words). That should be the end of it (not ideal, I know (from experience), but he's the boss).

Someone else already mentioned that this is more a case of a clash of personalities than anything to do with the law or IT. I'd agree.

If it makes you feel any better, I don't think you're the first employee ever who didn't see eye to eye with their boss!

padser

dade wrote: »

16.39 Yesterday

dade wrote: »

13.46 Yesterday

dade wrote: »

09.13 Yesterday

dade wrote: »

15.29 Monday

dade wrote: »

14.57 Monday

dade wrote: »

14.05 Monday

dade wrote: »

13.36 Monday

Clearly the content filtering system doesn't filter out boards.ie for you during work hours.

As IT manager how can you allow flagerent breeches of the 'law'. Do you not realise you have a duty to prevent offensive material from being seen in the firms office? I have seen some stuff on the 'beer gut and receeding hairline' forum that could be construed as pretty offensive to wimmen.

jhegarty

If such a law did exist (which is doesn't) then employers couldn't risk having an internet connection at all.... no filter is 100%....


oh and no windows in case something offensive happens outside...tv and radio is out... there would have to searches at the entrance in case someone tries to bring in a newspaper....

comer_97

there is no law but there are laws againsts harassment, sexual or otherwise. So if an employee sends around pron and someone is offended a case of sexual harassment could be levelled against the company, whose directors are liable.

But if this does go to court and the company can show that they have filters etc and an IUP (Internet Usage Policy) in place it shows that they made an effor to stamp out this sort of behaviour thus helping their case.

It's about covered their backs.

To the OP, if it wrankles you so much, leave. Don't be frustrated and miserable in a job, walk away, their lose and if a few years down the road you see them sued to high heaven over an email related harassment case, smile knowingly...

padser

comer_97 wrote: »

their loss

Given his posts to date on this issue I don't know how you are making that assumption

comer_97

I was talking from his point of view, if you know what I mean.