BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING DIGITAL BEHAVIOUR
Watching the Christchurch shooting at work or even on a work device at home could get you fired.
As technology has become more pervasive, so have the rules around how technology is used.
Businesses are increasingly installing software on work assets that tracks employees’ movements, the pages they visit and time spent in different corners of the digital world.
Big Brother is watching and, in many cases, you have said they can.
Most employment contracts now have a digital use policy, outlining how workers can and can’t use the internet as well as work computers and other digital devices.
It’s not just words. From an employer’s perspective, digital surveillance allows them to protect the business from commercial espionage, bullying and other bad behaviour during work hours. But for employees, it can feel invasive. So what are your rights when it comes to breaches of your workplace’s digital policy?
Accept you are being watched
Steve Byrne, director at Cyber Research, said the company monitored computer usage at about 50 companies.
‘‘With any employee relations matter where IT is involved, there is a need to collect evidence,’’ Byrne said.
His team allowed companies a significantly detailed level of transparency into the digital work lives of employees, he said.
‘‘Typically the types of information we are looking for on a daily basis is any kind of malicious activity that both employees or hackers commit,’’ Byrne said.
‘‘That might be from corporate fraud, to hacking, to theft but also any kind of malicious activity by employees doing things they shouldn’t be doing such as bullying or accessing information they shouldn’t be seeing.’’
Know what it is that you have agreed to
Employment lawyers encourage employees to be keenly aware of what they have agreed to with employment contracts and digital policies.
‘‘The wording of the relevant employment agreement or policy will be very important in these circumstances to determine what action an employer can lawfully take,’’ lawyer Catherine Stewart said.
For employees facing discipline for digital misbehaviour, the legitimacy of a case would depend on how the material was defined and whether an employee knew what they were viewing could be a problem, lawyer Steve Dukeson said.
In the case of people who viewed the livestream of the Christchurch terrorist attack, Dukeson said proof would be needed to show workers knew what they were watching would breach legal standards.
‘‘A key issue is, was it illegal and did the employee know or not?’’ Dukeson said.
Process is vital
All of the lawyers spoken to highlighted the need for robust process.
Proper dismissal procedure was vital, they said, even in cases where there were real concerns over the behaviour of an employee.
Lawyer Blair Scotland said he had seen cases where an employee deserved to be fired but, by failing to follow proper procedures, the company ended up having to pay compensation.
Scotland also raised concerns over employees who may have signed into social media and seen objectionable material playing before they realised what it was.
Proper procedure allowed workers the opportunity to explain themselves, he said.