Supreme Court Addresses Privacy of Employee Workplace Emails and Phone Content
What rights of privacy do employees have when using computers at work, sending text messages on a cell phone supplied by an employer, or even simply using a work phone? Several people would argue that an employee’s right to privacy is practically nonexistent when an employer provides computers and cell phones. If a company is paying for these electronics and their services, ownership does not belong to the employee. There is an expectation that an employee will respect and maintain certain boundaries based on grounds established by employment laws. However, a worker’s rights and these matters are further complicated when/if an employee contributes to a work-cell phone service bill.
As the Supreme Court examines whether workplace emails and cell phone calls/texts fall under the Constitution’s protection for privacy, most employers throughout the nation implement guidelines stating no right to privacy for employees using work computers and cell phones.
The LA Times reports on the recent case involving a Southern California police officer accused of sending sexually overt messages to a girlfriend using a work cell phone. In this particular case, the officer’s supervisor informed him that he was allowed to use his cell phone outside of office time if he agreed to pay for the additional service. Based on the article, Chief Justice John G. Roberts J. believes that it is understandable for the officer to have assumed that his private messages were private since he was paying for it. Other justices seemed to be in agreement with the idea the employees cannot claim a “reasonable expectation of privacy” if emails or texts are read later by an employer since companies greatly depend on these policies for financial balance and overall workplace structure and performance.
In a similar case two years ago, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that a police chief in Ontario did not have any legitimate reason, nor the right, to go through private messages sent to a Sergeant’s girlfriend. The decision was based on the ban of “unreasonable searches” detailed in the 4th Amendment.
Employers and workers await the much anticipated result of the Supreme Court’s decision. If a no-privacy policy for employers is decided upon by the justices, several businesses may need to re-write their employee guidelines. The court’s ruling may, however, narrow-in on privacy issues relating solely to law enforcement officers rather than workers as a whole.
