No privacy with work devices

‘‘A cold bolt of lightning’’ raced down a teacher’s spine as he walked into the principal’s office with his laptop.

The principal told him senior managers were worried the teacher – who can’t be named – was not maintaining professional boundaries.

The board of trustees had decided to get the laptop forensically examined, the principal told the teacher, including a hard drive search which would bring up thumbnails of any photos with skin in them.

Workplace digital devices have been at the centre of several employment issues in New Zealand. If you’re wondering whether your boss could search your work device, it seems the answer is yes – but not without good reason.

In the case above, the agitated teacher said he had photos of his family stored on the laptop. ‘‘I am a very private person and don’t want anyone to see them,’’ he said, according to a NZ Teacher Disciplinary Tribunal decision.

The man, who was recently granted permanent name suppression, later gave a laptop password but it didn’t work.

He repeatedly refused to swipe his fingerprint to give investigators access.

‘‘Regardless of whether there was in fact inappropriate material on the computer, the plain fact is that the computer was the school’s property and the respondent was preventing the school from accessing and using its property,’’ the tribunal decision reads. The teacher is not alone. A top cardiologist in Auckland took cellphone photos of his genitals and they ended up being synchronised to the hospital IT system.

And an Australian car dealership manager was caught looking up swimsuit models on his work computer after porn access was blocked.

Employers own work tools and, generally, the data which goes through them, employment law specialist Max Whitehead said.

‘‘It’s like [if] you have got a work vehicle and you go over the speed limit.’’

Reasonable personal use is often allowed, he said, and there are options to protect private information.

They include removing personal information before a check, an undertaking from the employer to stay out of the device, or using a trusted third party to decide disputes.

Some employees leave a job with their laptop locked to their profile and refuse to give a password. In that case, Whitehead said employers could seek damages.

Taking confidential work information is also a no-no, which cost one former gas company employee more than $1 million.

The man used the information to set up a rival business.

Employers should have clear policies and shouldn’t march up to ask for a search without good reason, E tu¯ national director of industries Jed O’Connell said. E tu¯ is the largest private sector union in New Zealand

Reasonable use policies lay out what’s acceptable and can save people spending thousands on personal devices, he said.

He knows what it’s like – he has a work iPhone, laptop and iPad.

The iPad is linked to his home email address, so he can keep up with work when he’s away.

His personal laptop links to his work one and he does use his work phone for some personal calls.

But it doesn’t go overseas, because he’s heard horror stories – including one about an employee who unwittingly racked up a $23,000 phone bill.

Anyone given a work device should double-check the employer’s rules, University of Waikato law professor Margaret Wilson said, but keeping a separate cellphone and email account for personal use can save some grief.

Employers can’t force a search of work devices, but can make the consequences of not complying clear, the office of the Privacy Commissioner said.

‘‘If an employer has clear policies in place, the Privacy Act is not a barrier to accessing employee information on a workplace IT system or hardware,’’ a statement from the office said.

‘‘But it needs to be done in a reasonable and proportionate way and with justification and by properly authorised people.’’ Cyclists are interlopers in the New Zealand transport system, cycling enthusiast Wayne Atwell says.

Atwell was part of a group of cyclists featured on a YouTube clip, now believed to be a hoax, that was shared thousands of times earlier this year.

A driver was profanities at them.

At the time, extremely upset.

‘‘I already knew that cyclists in New Zealand were treated as second-rate road citizens,’’ Atwell said.

But he’s since discovered he was only just grasping the full extent of how disliked they are. He

screaming

Atwell was had to leave the country to find out.

Atwell recently returned from a five-week cycling trip to Canada.

‘‘I had a wonderful time there. Immediately back in New Zealand, you get people trying to cut you off and being smart to you.

‘‘In Canada, you are given equal rights. They are constructing so many bike trails and lanes there, you actually feel like an integral part of the transport system.’’

Atwell said that by contrast, Kiwi drivers don’t give cyclists space and like to race past them just so they can turn right in front of them.

‘‘You wouldn’t do that to another car, so why would you do that to a cyclist?’’

Waikato Police Senior Sergeant Steven Ambler, who has spent several years in road policing, tends to agree with Atwell’s assessment.

People’s attitudes to cyclists in the North Island have always been mediocre, he said.

‘‘It’s no different now to what it has always been [in New Zealand],’’ Ambler said.

Ambler pointed to parts of Auckland where there are cycling lanes. ‘‘The drivers don’t seem to care and still take the cyclists’ space where they can.’’

Cycling Action Network spokesman Patrick Morgan believes street design is pitting the two road users against each other.

He disagrees with Ambler and believes drivers are, for the most part, respectful of designated cycling areas.

Because of that, Morgan believes city councils across the country need to invest in cycling lanes straight away to reduce the conflict on the roads.

‘‘There are idiots on the road – both cyclists and drivers,’’ Morgan says, adding that the majority of road users of both types are respectful.

Morgan does admit, however, that cyclists seem to bring out the worst in people.

‘‘There’s some kind of angry trigger when cyclists are about. I don’t know what it is. Maybe drivers don’t think cyclists contribute enough to roading, so they aren’t important.’’

Morgan doesn’t believe cyclists should have to pay a levy to help pay for upgrades to roads allowing for specific bike lanes.

‘‘Cyclists already pay enough and most of them probably have cars. No, cyclists shouldn’t have to pay.’’

He pointed to the $330 million grant the National government has allocated to cycle-friendly roading. He hopes it happens soon.

‘‘Of course I am going to say it’s not fast enough, but Rome wasn’t built in a day.’’