1 / 26

Social networks, the internet and privacy in the workplace

Social networks, the internet and privacy in the workplace. Prof B Grant (UKZN). 1. INTRODUCTION. The increasing use of the internet as a form of communication raises new challenges for employers:- - the use/ abuse of computer and network resources at work;

Download Presentation

Social networks, the internet and privacy in the workplace

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Social networks, the internet and privacy in the workplace Prof B Grant (UKZN)

  2. 1. INTRODUCTION The increasing use of the internet as a form of communication raises new challenges for employers:- - the use/ abuse of computer and network resources at work; - the nature and content of the communication; and - ways to monitor the communication.

  3. 2. The RIGHT TO PRIVACY S 14 (d) of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to privacy, including the right not to have the privacy of their communications infringed - employees have some expectation of privacy, even in the workplace

  4. Right to be privacy in employment may be limited by: Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act No. 70 of 2002 (RICA): * S 5 – if employee has given prior written consent

  5. * S 6 - a person conducting a business may intercept communications to monitor or to investigate unauthorised use - includes emails, telephones conversations, accessing of websites

  6. - Protea Tech. Ltd v Wainer and Others * employee telephone communications were tapped by employer * held: employee may receive and make calls which have nothing to do with his employer’s business.

  7. * although s/he must account to his/her employer if so required for the time so spent, the employer cannot compel her/him to disclose the substance of such calls. * the content of conversations involving the employer’s affairs (whether directly or indirectly) is a different matter

  8. * the employer is entitled to demand and obtain from an employee a full account * `In this sense also, the company can fairly be regarded as the owner of the knowledge in the employee’s mind.’

  9. * the employer has an interest: - not only in the substance; - but also in the manner in which the employee conducts himself - (whether by word or gesture) in carrying on his business

  10. 3. SOCIAL NETWORK SITES SNSs are web-based social network sites that allow individuals to: - construct a public or semi-public profile; - invite a list of other users to share a connection; and - view their list of connections and those made by others within that system.

  11. - e.g. Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Skype, blogs `A high tech cross between a bumper sticker and a diary, digital profiles commonly broadcast personal philosophies and preferences, as well as everything from artistic creations to the mundane details of everyday life.’ P Abril

  12. Difficulties for employer: - nature of the medium: public – if posted as a status, and public if sent to group of friend who pass it on to other friends - allows for personal expression without the benefit of editorial restraint - high level of potential, quick harm to the employer’s business interests

  13. 4.CYBER MISCONDUCT Possible Misconduct: (1) abuse of employer’s resources - may occur where there is a policy which prohibits employees from using the employer’s resources for private purposes

  14. - including company time - Latchmish v Billiton Aluminum * found guilty of misconduct for repeatedly accessing pornographic sites during working hours

  15. (2) dissemination of offensive or abusive material - racist; defamatory; sexist; pornography. - Edgars v CCMA * LC accepted that the sending of a racist joke to colleague was grounds for dismissal.

  16. - SACCAWU obo SIKHUNDLA v Radisson Blu Hotel * racist comments are not only offensive, but they create disharmony amongst employees

  17. (3) bringing the company into disrepute - Timothy v Nampak Corrugated * misconduct is it has the potential, at the very least, to call into question the reputation of the employer

  18. - FOSAWU v Gold Reef City Casino * employee was suspended for misconduct and posted a status on Facebook that he was dismissed because he was gay * it falsely created the impression that the employer violated Constitutional rights

  19. - Media Workers Association of SA v Kathorus Community Radio * posted Facebook comments that Board was corrupt and that manager was a criminal * dismissal fair

  20. - Sedick v Krisray (Pty) (Ltd) * posted derogatory comments about managers to each other * found them guilty because the comments could be circulated both inside and outside the company (customers, suppliers and competitors)

  21. - Some comments, however, cannot be said to bring the company into disrepute - COSAWU on behalf of Khumalo v Royal Ascot Superspar * the expression of individual political views does not bring the company into disrepute

  22. (4) creating disharmony in the workplace - Mahoro v Indube Staffing Solutions * accepted that messages posted on Facebook may create disharmony * employer failed to prove the offended employee was the subject of the discussion

  23. (5) Breach of trust - E Booyse v Veilile Tinto Cape Inc * employee was dismissed for posting a photograph of herself attending a function of the competitor - might also occur where employees post information about activities having lied to the employer re: their whereabouts

  24. 5. CONCLUSION - despite a range of cases where employees are dismissed, there are still many employees posting unedited information on SNSs

  25. - employers need clear policies on what is acceptable behaviour - employees need to be aware of the consequences of venting publicly and the limits of privacy in the workplace.

More Related